Active travel scheme for Guildford rejected

A new cycling and shared pedestrian scheme along London Road in Burpham had been recommended for approval and was backed by the county’s most senior highways and environment members.

Surrey County Council applied for funding from The Active Travel England on the back of several transport studies, with the aim of creating segregated footways and cycleways along the busy London Road.

The scheme was thrown out on safety grounds with opponents saying the narrow routes would put cyclists in conflict with pedestrians, and leave little space for heavy goods vehicles to pace along the road.

It had the backing of Guildford MP Zoe Franklin together with various ward councillors such as George Potter who argued the take-it-or-leave-it project, though not 100 per cent perfect, was a considerable improvement on the present layout.

They said the currently unsafe road and pathways put people off from walking and cycling – causing greater congestion along the main route in an out of Guildford town centre.

Others disagreed and said the scheme would have put pedestrians and cyclists into direct conflict with each other, put vulnerable people off using public transport, and – at its narrowest section – create tight pinch points.

Ultimately the objectors won with Surrey County Council leader Tim Oliver saying a line had now been drawn under the matter – which had been two years in the planning.

Yasmin Broome, on behalf of the Surrey Coalition of Disabled People said cyclists continued to travel too fast and chaotically along London Road, and urged the Tuesday, October 29, executive committee to “please please keep our disabled community safe and to and stop these proposals”.

Community engagement was held for 12 weeks from September to December 2023 with the council receiving 995 individual submissions, half saying the scheme would contribute to the safety of pedestrians and cyclists and vulnerable road users, against 31 per cent who disagreed.

The now dead-and-buried scheme would have put in improvements to the existing footways and five bus stops along the route – including new shelters and shared use space for pedestrians, bus passengers and cyclists.

Signs and markings would direct cyclists behind bus shelters, a controlled toucan crossing would have been installed south of Ganghill junction, while junctions with Kingpost Parade, Highclere, Abbotswood and Boxgrove Avenue updated to facilitate cyclist crossings.

The remaining crossings would be changed to parallel zebra and cyclist crossings.

Those speaking in favour urged the cabinet to seize the opportunity to create what they called a safer greener Guildford. Children spoke of how they had been forced off the roads and involved in accidents while cycling to school.

The new route would make it safer for hundreds of youngsters to cycle to school – cutting down on drop off and collection traffic, they added. One former pupil said: “We have to do something and this is the chance we have if we want to save the planet.”

Guildford Borough Councillor and ward member for Burpham Cllr George Potter added: “This is the best scheme possible given the restraints of the route.”

Their voices were overshadowed however by the majority of the cabinet who sided with speakers calling for the scheme to be scrapped.

Terry Newman told the meeting data suggesting the road was dangerous was erroneous and based of selective statistics.

He said: “Some infrastructure is actually worse than nothing as it promises novice cyclists some protection then abandons them when it’s most needed.’

Fiona Davidson Surrey County Council divisional member for Guildford South-East asked the committee to vote against the proposals.

She said it was not only unsafe but lacked public support “they say it will make it less safe for most road users, including cyclists”, she told the meeting.

The issue, she said, was that the A3100 was too narrow in places and risked creating the unintentional consequence of reducing the safety for all road users.

She asked: “ Do we really want to invest millions and take on that sort of risk?”

The scheme had been seen as critically important to the delivery of housing in Guildford with new developments reliant on improved access.

Closing the debate ahead of the vote, which rejected the plans by six votes to three, Surrey County Council leader Tim Oliver said: “I don’t think that this is safe. We have to be absolutely sure the new scheme is safer than what is there.”