Solum Appeal Win – ‘A Sad Day for Guildford’ Says Guildford Vision Group

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

The Guildford Vision Group (GVG) has labelled the announcement of Solum’s successful appeal against Guildford Borough Council’s unanimous rejection of their proposal to redevelop Guildford railway station as: “a sad day for Guildford”.

In a press release issued last night (January 22, 2018), GVG spokesperson Bill Stokoe said: “GVG wants to see an integrated transport hub at the station, with much better facilities for all travellers. The Solum development, now approved following the company’s appeal against GBC planning refusal, makes that goal all the more difficult.

Bill Stokoe

“The decision sets a retrograde tone, not just for the important station site, but for all future town centre development. Opportunistic developers will seize on the Solum precedent, with its unremarkable and unappealing architecture, to bring forward more dominating ten-storey and higher developments in the middle of the town.

“Solum predictably succeeded at this expensive council defeat because Guildford Borough Council failed to put in place adequate planning policies and controls to properly manage schemes of this scale. The extremely costly new Local Plan, recently submitted for examination by a planning inspector, still contains little to suggest that situation will change. The plan is virtually silent on the redevelopment of the town centre.”

John Rigg, chairman of GVG added: “This is a sad day for Guildford. I fear for our town. We don’t even get a state of the art station out of it. We welcome new homes but the main result here is a 300 metre, ten-storey wall that will block and spoil important cross-town views.

John Rigg.

“It will add to congestion, pollution and accidents on the failing gyratory, arguably one of the worst black spots in Surrey. It will add additional load to the already failing Farnham Road Bridge.

“The town centre needs a proper plan. It has needed one for years. We’ve seen nothing so far that addresses the key issues. We’re left with piecemeal development, which is not the right way forward.

“The question remains what do we get for the millions GBC’s planning activities cost?”

GVG launched its own masterplan for the town centre in February last year, winning, they say, much support from residents and others.

In the GVG plan, the station would become a transport hub and interchange, with improved access and facilities for all travellers. Station land is developed on both east and west sides in a coordinated way.

This, they claim, would mirror Network Rail’s chairman Sir Peter Hendy’s declared aim to see station land used productively and sustainably in the wider interests of a town centre and stakeholders.

Bill Stokoe continued: “Sadly the Network Rail and Solum scheme takes operational land and uses it principally for commercial and residential development, perhaps reflecting Treasury pressure on Network Rail just to find cash.

The proposed GVG route blocked by the Solum plan

“The key to the GVG approach is the new east-west corridor across the railway and river. It relieves the ailing gyratory and enables a range of exciting options. Not least it enables better, safer traffic-free corridors for pedestrians and cyclists across town but especially from the retail centre to the station.

“The riverside can also be opened up for much more public enjoyment, along with allowing other new green public spaces as well as a modern, open covered market.

“GVG also recognises that extra housing in the town centre is vital. In adopting a holistic rather than piecemeal approach in its masterplan, GVG claims its scheme will provide around 2,000 more homes in the centre to relieve the Green Belt than the submitted Local Plan.

“Crucially, the GVG plan does not involve heights greater than five storeys in places. That is similar to the town centre plan, especially at the station, outlined in the Allies & Morrison study commissioned and approved by GBC but sadly, and crucially, not formally adopted as planning policy.”

Share This Post