Newsletter

Summer 2010

CONTENTS

75 years old David Jeffery 3

The Planning Group John Wood 4

Transport Developments Maurice Barham 8

Annual Architecture Lecture Chris Blow 11

St Mary‘s Grows Older Mary Alexander 12

The Guildford Craft Markets Jonathon Tatlow 15

Green Lane, Guildown Avenue Gerald Bland 17

Civic Voice Gillian Cameron 18

Lunch Visit to Albury Park Tim Langhorn 20

Guildford Town Centre David Bunting 22

Guildford and Freiburg Celebrate 30 yrs Peter Slade 23

The Architecture Festival 2010 Doug Scott 26

A.G.M. Scrap Book 28-29

STOP PRESS Auriol Earle 30

Recent Planning Applications John Wood 31

New Members 35

Notice Board 36-37

Officers and Committee 38-39

This is the first Newsletter of The Guildford Society‘s 75th Anniversary year.

The front & back covers of this edition are the newly designed flyer with which we hope to attract more attention and more members. It was un-veiled for the AGM and was designed by Gidden Place – a design consul-tancy in Guildford. My thanks as always to contributors from within the Society and to guests: Mary Alexander for her piece on her recent research on St Mary‘s church; Jonathan Tatlow for his memories of the Craft Market; and Peter Slade whose article celebrates 30 years of the Guildford-Freiburg twinning ar-rangement. Also to the photographers of the Society who brighten our pag-es. You will notice that some of the detailed text – for example on planning applications – is published now only on the website. Editor David Smith Production Judy Beck Printing Purcoprint, Reading

75 Years Old

The Guildford Society has been a presence in the town for the past 75 years as its active Civic Society. Look-ing back it is good to recall so much achieved, and salutary to note one or two failures. If we are to fulfil the vision of our founders whose strapline stated that the Society was ―for the protection of the beauty and amenities of the Borough‖ one prerequisite is a strong, concerned and active membership.

Over recent months there has been a welcome trickle of new members – but our Membership Secretary had

to report that enrolments had failed to keep up with end-of-year non-renewals - from age, moving away or perhaps just forgetting to respond to reminders. Our total is around 500. When visiting our neighbour society at Farnham last month we learned that their membership stands at around 800, in a town of some 35,000. Guildford town is about double that.

And the pressures on its beauties and amenities continue. In the past year or so we have had to resist over-development of the Bedford Road area, we are concerned to prevent suburbanisation of the Green Lane above The Mount, we stressed the importance of keeping Guildford House in the public domain and fully accessible, we are working to try to ensure proper maintenance of our historic streets, with others we‘ve been able to persuade those responsible to phase long-neglected work to maintain Henley Grove and so keep intact the appearance of that crown of trees, we stressed the value of keeping the Queen Victoria jubilee drinking fountain at the railway station in the M&S re-building, and following considerable homework, which no-one else has both-ered to do, have submitted statistics showing just why the Debenham‘s pedes-trian crossing is creating such traffic chaos – and what might be done about it!

So there is need for continuing vigilance and an even stronger presence to protect those beauties and amenities. At its July meeting the Borough Council accepted a Town Centre Development Study prepared by consultants, a report which stresses the urgency of planning for growth but gives little emphasis to environmental qualities and those life-enhancing features which make the town so attractive. Especially at a time like the present when the public purse is limited – and the constant response to nearly every suggestion is ―there‘s no money‖ – a long-term vision is even more urgent, a vision looking way beyond the next election. The Guildford Society exists for that purpose.

And to achieve that, it needs to grow too – the larger our membership the greater our impact – with able and committed members. Our only recruiting

3

agents are our members, yourself and myself, so please make sure your friends, neighbours and family who value the qualities of this town of ours know why you are a member of the Society and see the point of sharing its purpose. Please use the single page flyer sent out before the AGM and which is the cover to this Newsletter, or refer people to the web site: (www.guildfordsociety.org.uk). This is my opportunity to stress once again that your Society needs you! Our Society is what we make it, and insofar as we are able to present a valid case, so is our town. As the content of this Newsletter makes clear you have really able and committed members on your Committee and each of the four working groups – please urge those who don‘t want to see Guildford‘s beauties and amenities lost to join, today. Thus we will share in the Anniversary celebrations noted in the accompanying programme in a spirit of optimism.

Michael Jeffery, Chairman

THE PLANNING GROUP The Planning Group, led by John Baylis, consists of Graham Hibbert, Ian Macpherson,

Amanda Mullarkey, David Ogilvie, Malcolm Sinclair, Susan Stewart, Martin Taplin, and

John Wood.

1. PLANNING POLICY

Slyfield Area Regeneration Project (SARP) John Davey, GBC‘s consultant and Project Coordinator for SARP has been in-strumental in keeping The Guildford Society advised and informed with this sen-sitive issue. In the last 6 months we have had three meetings, the most recent one on 22 June. We also attended a public meeting in Burpham on 15 March and two of us spoke. There is much public angst about traffic implications, but our main concerns at this stage are financial viability and the proposed density of 75dpha, which is far too much for a suburban site. Scott Brownrigg are being appointed as consultants to prepare the Masterplan and are obliged to consult with us and other stakeholders. South East Regional Select Committee Inquiry into Housing in the South East The above House of Commons select committee called for evidence for its in-quiry into housing in the South East and set out a number of questions on which it would welcome views. The Planning Group, on behalf of the Society, submit-ted a response to the question ‗Where should houses be built?‘ We argued that housing allocations should be based on holistic assessments of need and sus-tainability rather than on somewhat arbitrary categorisations such as the ‗hub‘

4

The committee published a report: it had only Labour members and it concluded that housing targets should be raised again. However the hub concept seemed to be de-emphasized in the report. The paper included all the submissions: the only ones from amenity/residents groups were from Guildford (us and EGRA). The Guildford Borough Council submission noted that 468 dwellings were completed in 2007/08, but only 145 in 2008/09. The South East Plan target is 422. The new government has swept all this away, see below. Consultation by DCLG on permitted development rights for small scale re-newable technologies We responded on behalf of the Society to this consultation. Our comments were of a detailed nature and are available if anyone wants to see them. We expressed particular concern regarding proposed regulation of noise from air source heat pumps, non-domestic uses in predominantly residential areas, noise from wind tur-bines and the definition of areas where there would be further protection. Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area Avoidance Strategy In September 2009 we responded at length to the Borough‘s consultation on a draft of its proposed Avoidance Strategy. We proposed that in many cases it would be better to open up SANG (suitable alternative natural green space) now in pri-vate ownership rather than to improve land that we, the public already ‗own‘ and use. We also argued in detail that the proposed new tariffs were unnecessarily high. A paper to the GBC in February reported on the consultation, set out proposed changes to the draft and recommended that the new Strategy be put in to effect as from 15

th March. The tariffs were reduced by about 40%. In our view they are still

inordinately high compared with those for recreational open space. The total cost in perpetuity, amortised at 2% index linked is £47,582,415. No further action by the Group is proposed. Conservative ‘Green Paper’ on ‘Open Source Planning’, and the new Govern-ment This paper set out the Conservative ideas for making root and branch changes to the planning system. They included abolition of the Regional tier and quashing of the South East Plan. There are several other highly significant proposals, including a third party right of appeal. Our comments were sent to Anne Milton, MP, on 1

st

April under a covering letter. Anne Milton sent them on to Caroline Spelman, MP, the then Shadow Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government. Our submission was acknowledged. The new government has announced it will abolish Regional Spatial Strategies (like the South East Plan), and has already amended PPS3 so that gardens are no l

5

longer classified as brown field sites and there is no longer a target housing densi-ty of 30 dwellings per hectare.

2. SIGNIFICANT SCHEMES OR OTHER CONTENTIOUS ISSUES Guildford House We drew attention to the paper to the GBC Exec which suggested that Guildford House be marketed to establish what interest there is and upon what terms it may be sold or leased. We spoke at the meeting of the GBC Executive on 25

th February to oppose the

disposal of Guildford House. The Executive said Guildford House will not be sold. We also attended and spoke at a public meeting organized by HTAG on 2

nd

March. There was not much support for an art gallery at 170 High Street and we floated the idea of a Trust to take responsibility for running Guildford House and sought to engage Guildford Arts. The matter went to the GBC Scrutiny committee on 11

th March and back to the Executive on 25

th March. It now appears that 170

High Street has been found to be unsuitable for a gallery, but the idea of moving the TIC into Guildford House is still in play. Burpham Court Farm We wrote to Andrew Hodges and Jenny Wicks on behalf of the Society and EGRA to ask for a public consultation before any decision is made as to whether to sell off any part of Burpham Court Farm. A paper to the GBC Exec on 7

th January pro-

posed that the farm house and two cottages be sold and that the land and other buildings should be leased for two years only because of possible use in connec-tion with the Slyfield Area Regeneration Project (SARP). We thought the farm house and cottages may be useful to the Borough in the future and should not be sold. We suggested the farm house and cottages be let for two years only. The GBC Executive meeting was held on 28

th January. EGRA addressed the Exec

meeting and it was decided that the farmhouse and cottages should be put on the open market. However the Council has not yet filed a planning application. St Lukes’ Pedestrian Link with Charlotteville The meeting of the GBC Scrutiny committee on 3

rd November considered a paper

on enforcement of Section 106 conditions. The paper focused on the failure to pro-vide the St Lukes‘ pedestrian link with Charlotteville promised at the time of the planning application for St Luke‘s Square and Park. We concluded that the Socie-ty's support for the link had lapsed when Holy Trinity Primary School refused to provide land to complete the link to Charlotteville. We are generally in favour of any new public footpath in the urban area of the town because we generally sup-port anything which will improve the pedestrian permeability of the town.

6

Public Access from the DEFRA site (Boxgrove Gardens) to Merrow Downs In the light of the regrettable experience of residential developments at Queen Elizabeth Barracks and at St Luke‘s where routes for public access were incorpo-rated into the planning proposals for development but where, following completion of the development and in consequence of land being sold or transferred to other owners, proposed public access routes were not secured, the Group has written to David Hill, GBC Chief Executive, requesting assurance that all necessary actions are in hand to provide the promised public access from the DEFRA site (Boxgrove Gardens) to Merrow Downs. Carol Humphrey replied in February to say the necessary provisions are in place. We think this is a useful ‗marker‘. [Note: phase 1 of the site development is well under way, the marketing suite is open and some houses have been sold. The development is very cramped – a direct consequence of 40 dpha. Queen Elizabeth Barracks and at St Luke‘s es-tates are more open.] Holy Trinity Church, High Street ramp Last November we objected to an application for the removal of an extensive part of the retaining wall fronting the High Street and the replacement of it with a zigzag ramp. The system of ramps proposed for disabled access will cut into the existing bank between the Church and the High Street to a very noticeable extent. We sug-gested instead a motorised stairlift at the side. The case officer seemed to agree with us and recommended refusal, pointing out that other methods of access had neither been costed nor explored. However there were 31 letters urging approval, many from residents of Abbot‘s Hospital, and the GBC Planning Committee over-turned the officer‘s recommendation. Ian Macpherson, one of our planning group members, undertook further research and even travelled to Bristol to view alterna-tive systems currently being used. His discussions found that whilst there are con-siderable benefits there can be maintenance problems with motorised stairlifts and that they need to be key-operated to avoid misuse. On balance, the Planning Group decided to take no further action but we believe Holy Trinity should recon-sider their options. Bedford Road, Guildford – Bedford Square In February 2009 the Council submitted a planning application for 126 flats on its site by the river. The application disregarded all our previous representations and in response we mounted a mini-campaign of objection, upon which we have re-ported in previous Newsletters: Winter 2009. At the suggestion of Cllr Roy Hogben we followed this up with positive proposals set out in a Society ‗Feasibility Study‘ kindly prepared by David Ogilvie. A set of sketches showed what could be achieved. This was circulated to key Councillors and Officers, and was presented at private meetings with Andrew Hodges and with Chris Mansfield, GBC Head of Economic Development. It would appear that GBC have shelved any plans for the time being as we are still awaiting a decision.

7

3. THE PLANNING GROUP

The Planning Group has continued to meet every three weeks at the Council offic-es. Since the Winter Newsletter the Group has written 51 letters to the Head of Planning Services on a wide range of individual planning applications, mostly in the town‘s urban area. As far as we know from informal feedback these letters are well received by Planning Officers even if they do not always agree with our views. The-se letters also help maintain the Society‘s profile with the general public. Full details of all our submissions have been placed on the Society‘s website but in summary we have written as follows:

We wrote 7 letters either in support of applications or we made suggestions for improvement.

We wrote 19 letters objecting to various applications for permission for adver-tisements mainly within the town centre. Of these, 5 were approved; 13 were refused or approved only after our objections had been overcome by the submission of amended plans; and 1 has not yet been decided.

We wrote 25 letters of objection about various applications for permission to alter existing buildings or for the demolition of whatever is currently on the site and the replacement with further buildings, most of which were for resi-dential homes. Of these, 3 have been approved, 4 applications have been withdrawn, 11 have been refused and 7 have not yet been decided.

In the past we have published a complete list of the relevant applications in the Newsletter. This time there are far too many to be published in full although they have all been placed on the website for those who wish to look at the full list or a particular application. Brief details showing the flavour of some the applications we have considered since the last Newsletter are given on page 31

John Wood

TRANSPORT DEVELOPMENTS

In June we received assurances that our ideas for inclusion in Transport for Guildford (TfG) had been considered, but it is expected to be some time before the preferred schemes are published. In the meantime, for those who are interested, our presentation is on the Society‘s web site. It is unfortunate that the current economic climate is likely to see a number of capital projects cancelled, or at least, deferred, so at the moment we understand that work on TfG is suspended.

...Continued page 10

8

Photo courtesy of gnasheruk on flickr website

As a result of GBC‘s discussions with Westfield, the question of the inclusion of a new bus station in their projected extension to the Friary has arisen and there is interest in seeking an alternative location for it. We have been looking at options and have worked out one or two ways in which the Mary Road car park site might be used as a bus station with passenger facilities in a corner of the Bedford Road car park. We will be putting these ideas on our website. Many of us have realised for some time – and now there have been letters in the local press – that the pedestrian crossing of Millbrook at Debenhams is creating a traffic bottleneck at busy times. We have discussed the principle of Puffin crossings on these pages before, but not necessarily recommending the way they operate, particularly under very busy conditions of both traffic and pedestrians. We seriously oppose the lack of the ―green man‖ pedestrian signal across the road. But the DfT prohibits(!) this and says it will be solved by education of the public. As we would probably be the only country in the world without such indication, this seems unlikely. We have now carried out a detailed survey, covering two Saturday mornings and a weekday around 5pm and have analysed our observations in relation to the Department for Transport‘s ―Puffin Good Practice Guide‖. We believe that there is scope for adjusting the timings by about 10 seconds to increase the traffic flow without unreasonaby inconveniencing pedestrians. There are several pedestrian safety aspects which have come to light, largely, we believe, due to the absence of the signal mentioned above, which we are also reporting on. Our report will go to the County Transport authority and we will probably also make a representation to the DfT.

There are concerns about traffic and parking in the area of the Egerton Road (RSCH) roundabout and Gill Avenue, which the University and TfG have been studying. So we thought it a good time to revive the idea of a simple pedestrian halt on the railway at Park Barn - similar to the one at Sandhurst. We made the suggestion and have been told that it might be viable provided the track is levelled at that point. This would cost millions, and raise other technical issues like time-tabling to be resolved. The County has opened consultation on the next Surrey Transport Plan – LTP3 – and we have produced a submission on the first two tranches: Vision and Objectives. We opposed the use of the wording Sustainable Transport as a primary objective of the Plan, and the Climate Change Strategy. The next one to be announced concerns Congestion Strategy which should be an interesting exercise.

Maurice Barham

10

ANNUAL ARCHITECTURE LECTURE - 15th JUNE

For the fourth Annual Architecture Lecture, the Guildford Society returned to its home ground. After three previous events concerned with 21st Century architecture and engineering, this year the audience was treated to an intimate view of the de-sign of museum and gallery spaces, focusing on the Watts Gallery restoration pro-ject at Compton. Introduced by Pat Grayburn, Arts Administrator at the University, the invited speaker was Adam Zombory-Moldovan. He is the architect assigned the task of "saving the past to serve the future" of the Watts Gallery, and is a specialist in the field. This annual event is a joint venture of The Society and the University of Surrey, and was held again in the School of Management Lecture Theatre. Society members, Watts

Gallery supporters and interested members of the University and the public heard about the project to breathe new life into a local treas-ure. Illustrated by examples of galleries all over Europe, Adam‘s talk analysed the way in which domestic-scale spaces are created to enhance the experience of art. The talk and the subsequent discussion high-lighted the dilemma faced by designers of spaces which enable curators to display works of art of all types to their best advantage, and to create the best opportunities for the viewing public. There were also interesting insights into con-servation and building restoration. The build-ing was designed and erected within G F Watts' lifetime specifically to display his work; but now over 100 years later the building has decayed. Original wallcoverings from 1904 are being uncovered, and trials of different types of natural lighting are a preoccupation of the Watts Gallery team. A paramount principle

is to retain the atmosphere and memory of the original building. The new project is therefore a judicious combination of restoration, conservation and change, and we all look forward to seeing the finished product.

The two lecturers Adam Zombory-Moldovan and Lucy Clark, of ZMMA (Zombory Moldovan Moore Architects), with Pat Grayburn, University Arts Administrator, with Chairman Michael Jeffery. Photo Doug Scott

11

The chairman of the Guildford Society, Michael Jeffery, thanked the speaker and many from the audience repaired to the Lakeside Restaurant for supper. Those present who were not already Friends of Watts Gallery were encouraged to enrol and help raise the last part of the cost of the project. The Lewis Elton Gallery in the University mounted an exhibition in July on a theme related to the lecture: the Compton Cemetery Chapel.

Chris Blow

.

Footnote from Auriol Earle&Pat Grayburn: Some shortcomings were noted with the supper, and these are being taken up with the management of the Lakeside Restaurant.

ST MARY’S GROWS OLDER

In 2009 I published a new guide book to St. Mary‘s, the previous one having been out of print for many years. In writing it I came to some different conclu-sions from previous writers on the church, mainly by dating it earlier than was previously thought. Of course, all research is subject to re-assessment by oth-ers, and I am quite prepared for my dates to be disputed, but I hope that what I have done is to restore St. Mary‘s to its proper level of importance. The most controversial dating, perhaps, is the tower. I would like to see it being as early as the mid 10

th century. Everyone accepts it as being late Saxon, but

this can mean anything from c.950 – 1100. This time bracket was established by H. M. Taylor in a survey of Anglo-Saxon churches. Guildford is given little importance in this survey, not surprisingly when it is competing with St. Martin‘s, Canterbury, Jarrow or Deerhurst. However, it is important locally and perhaps further afield.

12

The tower is an example of how tentative dates in history can become accepted ‗facts‘. A study in 1872 mentioned that the tower was perhaps fifty years older than another feature which the author dated to around 1100. A later author therefore described the tower as ‗about 1050‘ and this soon came to be ‗1050‘. An oddly specific date of 1036 has also been mentioned. We cannot date the tower, or most of the church, as specifically as that, but it is all too easy to drop the ‗possibly‘, ‗may be‘ or ‗about‘ when talking of dates. The tower was originally a western tower of a much smaller church. It has pilaster strips and double-splayed windows, which date it to the late Saxon period, which of course includes a generation after the Norman Conquest when English masons could still be working in their own style. The pilaster strips are thought to be decorative, and to represent the up-right timbers in the more usual timber buildings of the time. They are too shal-low to be for strengthening. It is argued that the much more decorative stone-work at Earl‘s Barton is also carpenter‘s work translated into stone, and in fact much Saxon stone building seems to be that of carpenters working in an unfamil-iar medium. The walls of St. Mary‘s, and other local Saxon towers such as Comp-ton church, are built of rubble masonry, with no ashlar work at the corners, be-cause there was no suitable local stone for this. St. Mary‘s is of flint, Compton of Bargate stone. These walls were constructed by spacing two wooden panels the required distance apart and filling it with rubble and mortar to form the walls. The outside would then be faced, with flints at St. Mary‘s, in roughly coursed levels. The lack of ashlar quoins robs us of another method of dating the tower. The other method we have is the windows, which are double-splayed: ie splayed on the inside and the outside, to let more light in. The windows are very small, and round-headed. Again, if we had good building stone we might have seen baluster-shaped mullions within an ashlar frame, which could help to date it. Both the pilaster strips and the double-splayed windows continued to be used after the Conquest, so we need to look at what was happening in Guildford to try to date the church more closely. Sometime in the 10

th century a king laid out a planned

town next to the existing settlement at Guildford, which was along Quarry Street. This explains why St. Mary‘s is apparently on a side street today. There were many 10

th century towns in Wessex with a similar street plan, with a central street

and two parallel streets marking the boundary, such as Totnes, Wallingford and Malmesbury. This was a period when towns were being deliberately created as

centres of defence against the Vikings, of justice, of trade and royal power. King Alfred had a property at Guildford, which may have been a royal property handed down to him from previous generations of kings. He began a process of building burhs or fortified sites, and around 919 a list of these was made, called the Burghal Hidage. Guildford was not in this list, but Eashing was. The site of the burh at Eashing is a promontory on the cliff above the river, and was probably one of the emergency burhs, not one intended to be developed as a major centre. By 975 however, Guildford had a mint, showing that it had become an important town by that date. So, could the stone church have been built around this time, to enhance the new town? I like to think so, and am claiming it partly to be provocative and to make people think again about Guildford and its importance.

The other major re-dating is of the transepts. These have traditionally been dated to c.1120, on the grounds that St. Mary‘s (and Holy Trinity) were given to Merton Priory at about that date, and that the canons of Mer-ton are likely to have enlarged the church. However, Pevsner has described the arches cut through the tower walls to the transepts as early Norman, ie around 1066 to 1100, and they are far too plain to be of 1120. They are clearly later than the tower because they are partly cut through the Saxon windows. If they were built before about 1100 this is very early for a cruciform parish church: normally only cathedral or monastic churches were cruci-form at that point. Again, this points to St. Mary‘s having an importance that has not been recognised. The new nave west of the

tower must have been built at the same time – it would be inconceivable to have the transepts without the western nave. I did wonder for a while if the transepts could be Saxon porticûs but decided, sadly, that the arches were too wide and too Nor-man to be the door to Saxon side chambers. There are still aspects of St. Mary‘s I am not sure about: the chancel, and the date of the side chapels added to the apses, for example. The church architect has just found that the outside wall of the north chapel continues east for a distance, as if the chapel was going to have a square end. Was there a change of plan? New things will continue to be discovered, and new interpretations made. That is what is so fascinating about old buildings.

Mary Alexander—Church Warden

July 2010

BURTON, Charles : ST. MARY'S CHURCH,

N. GUILDFORD. [London, 1824].

The Guildford Craft Markets The annual Christmas Craft Market is an important feature of shopping in the town. It

is also a significant revenue earner for the Society. We asked Jonathan Tatlow, whose

memory spans the history of the market, to explain how it came into being.

In the early 1970s, when Millbrook and the gyratory system had just cut the town in two so brutally, insult was added to injury by the abysmal standard of architecture that began to arise from the huge demolition sites between Millmead and the Onslow Bridge. On the advice of a potter friend Mary Won-drausch, I joined the Guildford Society – if only to add my voice to the protests. At first I was a member of the Design Group. In 1975 I received a phone call from Auriol Earle, who is still a very active member of the Committee, asking if I would be interested in running a craft market on the recently closed town bridge to raise funds for the Society. I was at that time a struggling, freelance graphic designer and was definitely interested in a part-time business venture on my doorstep. I live at the foot of The Mount and can see the bridge from my front gate. Thus on successive Saturdays that summer, market stalls appeared on the old bridge for the first time in its history and local craftworkers laid out their wares. In those days craft shows were rare and a regular seasonal craft market was, I think, unheard of. That first season was a success, if modest by later stand-ards; and the stallholders were keen to return in the weeks leading up to Christmas. We tried to take advantage of the Christmas crowds by setting small stalls under Tunsgate Arch. At that time the roadway of Tunsgate still continued narrowly through the arch to join the High Street. It became clear that the space left was too limited and in the cruel winter winds we froze to the bone. From that point on the Town Bridge became the regular venue for the markets in summer and at the pre-Christmas season – usually for ten Saturdays in suc-cession. From the start, the Guildford Society‘s Craft Markets provided an un-paralleled opportunity for enterprising and energetic craftworkers to present their work to the public. And so it continues to this day. The Society can be as proud of this contribution to the town as it is of its many other gifts and innova-tions. The market also gave craftsmen an opportunity to develop their business. John Fox, long-time independent jeweller in the High Street, sold his first silver ring at the Society‘s first market. And Paul Eaton, the Cranleigh jeweller,

15

brought his statuettes of birds of prey and a real, live buzzard to one of the early markets. And Anne Young, canal boat painter, was a regular for many years and eventually published a book on the subject, which is still in print. Then the markets suffered a setback: ?in 1980. The Town Bridge was deemed unsafe and was dismantled and removed for renovation. If the market was to continue the stalls would have to be arranged along the Millbrook railings and around what remained of the ramp up to the gaping void where the Bridge had been. This location was cramped, noisy and potentially dangerous, and the river crossing had been reduced to a narrow metal walkway. Numbers fell but some stallholders bravely carried on with the good humour and camaraderie essential to any such enterprise. But more change was to come. In 1983 the Council decided to revive Guildford‘s Annual Summer Festival and I was invited by the redoubtable Matthew Alexan-der, curator of the Museum, to bring ―my markets‖ up into the High Street for the duration. Now, from the earliest days, and especially when trade was quiet, stall-holders had looked longingly from the bridge at the crowds in the High Street; but we knew that the big shops would never accept our competition at their very doors. But when the initiative came from elsewhere the doors of Free Trade mag-ically opened. It was an offer I could not refuse; but my brief was to increase awareness of the Festival as well as to raise funds for it. Inevitably the Society‘s summer season on the Bridge was eclipsed, and its revenue lost. But again the Guildford Society should be proud to have been the progenitor of the Festival Markets, which in their prime were an outstandingly popular and successful event in the town‘s calendar. I remain most grateful to Auriol Earle and the Society (not forgetting a succession of the Society‘s Treasurers and Chairmen with whom I have liaised over the years) for giving me the opportunity to discover and develop a little-known occu-pation: that of street market manager, or The Toby, as I understand is the title. Unlike shops, markets are literally here to-day and gone to-morrow and, at their best, the personalities of the individual traders as much as their wares combine to create an ambience that encourages passers-by to linger and perhaps to pur-chase. Over the years, among the ever-changing line-up of stallholders, the Toby is the constant central figure. We are very fortunate that Colin Styles was pre-pared to take over from me. From the viewpoint at my front gate it appears that the Guildford Society‘s Craft Markets will be a part of our town for many years to come.

Jonathan Tatlow

Green Lane, Guildown Avenue

Some of our readers may not be aware of the controversy caused by the building of a large house on top of the hill opposite the Cathedral which is accessed by The Mount. At the original application the Guildford Society objected to development on this site. Guild-ford Borough Council had no objection in principle; but refused the application because it felt that the land should be more intensively developed! At the appeal GBC argued that the site should be developed with flats; but the application received planning consent. Thus the Inspector overruled objections by GBC and the Guildford Society. It was named "Chantry View" - not to be confused with Chantry View Road. Gerald Bland, who is a legally qualified member of the Guildford Society, offered to look into some of the prob-lems raised by this issue which he explains below. Auriol Earle/Martin Taplin

There are important issues arising from vehicular access from Green Lane to Chantry View, the house recently erected in the back garden of 24 Guildown Avenue. Surrey County Council are currently preventing such access. Why is this and why is it important? In 1936 this Green Lane was recorded in the Rights of Way Act map as a public bridleway. The first Definitive Map in 1950, and all later versions show Green Lane as a bridleway and nothing else. Nonetheless, the owners of Chantry View claim to have acquired vehicular rights over Green Lane as a result of long use by themselves, from July 2008, and further by the owners of 24 Guildown Ave-nue, from October 1988. Unless some compromise can be reached this claim will end up in the Courts. The outcome will directly affect other Guildown Ave-nue residents who would be able to implement outline planning permissions they have already been granted to build at the top of the hill in their back gardens. As the Loseley Estate have also cancelled the restrictive covenants affecting 24 Guildown Avenue and some of the other building plots, all that now stands be-tween (say) a block of flats fronting either Guildown Avenue or Green Lane is the grant of new planning permission. The immediate prospect of that occurring may seem remote; but we know that the social and economic pressures from an increasing population and a finite supply of land will inevitably ratchet up the like-lihood. If that were not enough our investigations have also revealed that the open downland on the other side of Green Lane, which the Borough Council had the foresight to acquire in 1930, are not dedicated as public open space. So the Council's current strategic property review could well result in part of this open space also being released for development.

17

One of the primary aims of the Guildford Society is to conserve the town's heritage. It is difficult to identify a more prominent piece of Guildford's heritage than the green space visible on the horizon from the High Street framed by a hedgerow immediately adjoining Green Lane, itself a prehis-toric ridgeway, which was in medieval times the southern boundary of the Royal Forest of Windsor. So the long running Chantry View debate and its sequel raises some important issues about how pro-active a voluntary organisation with unlimited liability but limited funds should be in securing its members wishes where local opinion may be divided. We would value your comments and suggestions.

Gerald Bland

Civic Voice “Nowhere should be without its civic society and no-one should be without the

voice you can provide” HRH The Prince of Wales, Oct 2009

Following the extensive consultations of the Civic Society Initiative, report-ed previously in Newsletter, the new national charity for the civic move-ment was launched in London on April 17

th. It is called Civic Voice. To

quote their website (www.civicvoice.org.uk/) “Civic Voice is the nation-al charity for the civic movement. We make places more attractive, enjoyable and distinctive. We promote civic pride.” The civic movement is one of the largest social groups in the country, based on a network of more than a thousand local civic and amenity soci-eties totalling over 250,000 individual members. (The first civic society was founded in the 1840s. The Old Guildford Society was established in 1897.) Individual societies are fiercely independent, and many have built up ex-pertise within their ranks and local influence. Beyond this, there is a need for a central body to gather and disseminate relevant information and ide-as and to provide advice when needed. It is important that there is a strong national voice to represent the views and wishes of the societies to decision makers in government, business, the media and elsewhere. The vision of Civic Voice is that by 2015 everyone will live somewhere of which they can be proud. It intends to be active on the national, city and local stages, working in partnership with various other national organisa-tions across the UK, and enabling the civic movement to reach more plac-es and benefit people from all walks of life. It hopes to establish a reputa-

18

tion and authority which will make it the automatic choice for consultation of those seeking to develop, conserve or interpret the character of our towns and villages. It will inform, advise, and act on behalf of communities everywhere. Network part-nerships with the RSA, Heritage Alliance, Community Sector Coalition, Public Realm Information Advice and National Trust have already been established and meetings held with several Ministers. Kay Andrews, Chair of English Heritage, gave strong support to Civic Voice in her first speech in the House of Lords. Civic Voice will lead national campaigns, working through local groups and socie-ties. Its Street Pride campaign aims to make places more attractive and enjoyable by removing unnecessary street clutter (Save Our Streets); and the Love Local campaign seeks to champion what makes people proud about where they live. It has the support of the Prime Minister and his deputy. The reform of the land use planning system, the importance of Blue Plaques, High Speed Rail 2 and the fu-

ture of coastal towns are all issues on the current cam-paigning agenda. Civic Voice is a small, grass-roots organization, seeking to raise its funds through membership to guarantee its independence. Its core members are civic societies (like The Guildford Society), amenity and other local groups, who pay an annual capitation fee of £1.50 per ordinary member, up to a limit of £500. Individuals can also join, as can other organisations, business and public sector bodies. Membership now stands at

over two hundred societies. Many societies have shown interest but have delayed joining until they see what they will gain by doing so. They need to be encouraged to think also in terms of what they can contribute to the civic movement and the wider community. At a time of re-newed political interest in localism and the benefits of empowering communities, the civic movement can be central to supporting and developing the sense of identity and belonging that comes from positive feelings about the places where people live. The Chairman of Civic Voice is Paula Ridley, CBE, Hon FRIBA , formerly a Chair-man of the Trustees of the V&A Museum, who has been involved with the civic movement for over 30 years. Tony Burton, Hon FRIBA, is the Director, having left the National Trust, where he was Director of Strategy, to take up the challenge of recreating a national organisation following the demise of the Civic Trust. David Bunting and Gillian Cameron maintain contact with Civic Voice on behalf of the Guildford Society. Please contact either of them if you would like to seek fur-

Paula Ridley

Tony Burton

Lunch Visit to Albury Park Mansion The members’ annual lunch this year

took advantage of one of the last op-

portunities to visit Albury Park Man-

sion. David Bunting was able to call

on the kind hospitality of owners Jen-

nifer and Nigel Whalley, who catered

the occasion and Nigel acted as guide,

together with Bill Folkes, the Secre-

tary of the Albury History Society.

We learned that the property, settled

since Saxon times, passed through

various hands to the Dukes of Norfolk,

one of whom made the dwelling Ital-

ianate around 1660 (at the time of the

restoration of both Charles II and Nor-

folk’s dukedom). A fire in 1697 did

much damage occasioning Samuel Thornton, the owner in1800, to commission Sir John

Soane to do a makeover: this included a cantilevered staircase much admired by GSoc mem-

bers and a drawing room in signature Soane yellow. The house, in classical style, was also

partially gothicized by Henry Hakewill. After purchase by Henry Drummond, who moved

the whole village of Albury to give himself privacy, and made the old parish church his per-

sonal chapel, Augustus Pugin was brought in completely to alter the external character of the

house. Even advocates of retaining a house’s original style found Pugin’s 64 chimneys (in a

Tudor style which also graces some of the buildings in the new village) memorable.

At one point in its recent history this magnificent building was divided up into small apart-

ments for retired military people – Major Howard of Pegasus Bridge fame was one - latterly

a wedding venue, and now to have the scale of its great rooms restored by division of the

house into a few grand apartments. Members may have seen Jennifer and Nigel interviewed

on the BBC programmes Country House Rescue.

ther information or receive Civic Sense, the informative e-newsletter produced by Civic Voice. As a benefit to all members of civic societies, which join Civic Voice a free pass to a National Trust property can be obtained. Details page 35

Gillian Cameron

Members listen intently to Nigel Whalley

(tallest figure third from left) explaining a

point of detail. Photos: Tim Langhorn

20

The weather was fine for us, the grounds idyllic and for some a visit to the chapel

rounded off a pleasant occasion.

Tim Langhorn

Guildford Town Centre – Improving Our Urban Space

Guildford is thriving. That is the message from Chris Mansfield, Head of Economic Development at GBC. All the economic indicators of vibrancy seem to be bucking the national trend here. The High Street retail sector is maintaining its competitive edge: footfall levels remain high and unoccupied premise levels are low. The high rents in the town centre, however, operate against those small independent retail-ers who contribute towards Guildford‘s identity. There is more retailing going on than that provided by shops. We have the North Street Charter markets, the High Street Arts market, the Farmers‘ Market, and the Christmas market on the Old Bridge. More may be on the way. Are their loca-tions most suitable? Should there be more markets, or maybe less. We also have stalls dotted around at various spots selling fruit and flowers, ice cream and hot potatoes. How are decisions made to permit A but not B at a certain location? The summer is a lovely time to sit out with a coffee on the pavement: the café cul-ture is welcome. So too is street entertainment, and few will object to the presence of charities. Then we have the ―A‖ boards, sandwich boards and the like. There is so much going on. What can improve? What needs control? In November the Society is arranging its annual Open Forum. Previous subjects have been on transport and the Night Economy. This year we are focusing on our ―Townscape‖, not on grand schemes for the future, but on managing the streets for the benefit of all. It will be an opportunity for all our members to contribute to a public discussion on what local people like and dislike in the town centre and what improvements could be recommended.

The issue of responsibility is one which will surely feature – especially between the County Council and the Borough Council. How well do you know who is responsi-ble for what? The Highway surfaces, not only setts but paving surfaces continue to raise concerns. Many towns have conducted audits to identify what is and isn‘t necessary, especially with regard to signage and street furniture. Guildford is good, but how much better could it be? Does it matter, for example, that the Guildford blue of the bins and poles of the lower High Street is not being retained?

Such issues will be the concern of the Forum. Your contribution will be important and welcome. Please come and please tell others. The Forum takes place on November 11

th at the Council Chamber offices from

2pm.

David Bunting

22

Guildford & Freiburg Celebrate 30 Years’ Twinning

Freiburg is a delightful city in south-western Germany, situated on the edge of the Black Forest and in the Baden wine-growing region. For the past 30 years it has been Guildford‘s Twin Town. In 1979 the Mayors of Guildford and Freiburg signed a Deed of Partnership as ―a token and promise of lasting friendship be-tween the two communities and an encouragement to regular mutual liaison, to exchange experiences and to support the coming together of our citizens in eve-ry sphere‖. In the same year the Guildford Freiburg Association was formed to promote these aims by encouraging and arranging contacts and visits and organ-ising events. Twinning is now a reality: civic visits and many ex-change visits by organisations and individuals every year. Some examples: George Abbot School and the Goethe Gymnasium have had pupil exchanges for over 20 years, Guildford City Boys‘ Football Club have played matches with Freiburg‘s Blau Weiss Boys‘ Club for 25 years; in the arts, Vivace Chorus and the Freiburg Bach Choir hold regular joint concerts; ex-change visits are arranged by Guildford Rotary Club and the Guildford-Freiburg Churches Link with their counterparts in Freiburg; and clubs of all kinds, such as the Guildford Amateur Radio Group, the Guildford Soroptimists and others twin regularly. Recently the archery clubs of both towns have arranged on-line archery matches. Our twin city is very internationally-minded. They have eight twin towns besides Guildford -- Besançon (France), Granada (Spain), Innsbruck (Austria), Isfa-han (Iran), Lviv (Ukraine), Madison (USA), Matsuya-ma (Japan) and Padua (Italy). Guildford is in very good company indeed! For the past four years, Freiburg has organised a Partner Cities Market. All the twin towns are invited to set up stalls in a large marquee in the city centre where they can promote the charms of their towns and arrange cultural events. Guildford has been represented each June, and will be again this year, by volunteers from the Guildford Freiburg Association who work hard to explain to Freiburgers what a splendid place Guildford is for a visit. They are joined by members of the Freiburg Anglo-German Club who dispense free Eng-lish tea and home-made cakes. Last June there was an exhibition of photographs contributed by the Guildford Photographic Society and a tasting of beer from the Hogs Back Brewery and some poetry and prose readings by Guildford authors.

23

Facts & Figures

With a population of 210,000, Freiburg is a good deal larger than Guildford but there are plenty of similarities between the twins. Both are historic towns sur-rounded by lovely countryside. Both are regional shopping centres and mag-nets for business activities, with an increasing emphasis on the ―knowledge economy‖. Both have a high quality of life and a rich artistic and cultural scene and both have a university and a cathedral.

Freiburg‘s magnificent Gothic cathedral dates from 1510 and stands in the city‘s ancient market place, where a daily farmers‘ market is held. Freiburg Uni-versity, founded in 1457, has more than 25,000 students. The city has a splen-did new concert hall, several other theatres and concert halls, a range of muse-ums, art galleries and sports facilities and a number of health spas. The Frei-burg Baroque Orchestra is world-famous and the city‘s football team is in the premier division of the German football league. Germany’s ―Green Capital“ Freiburg is world-famous for its enlightened environmental policies. The city is strongly committed to energy-saving and the use of renewable energy. Its en-thusiastic development of solar energy means that it has become Germany‘s solar capital. There is a very impressive, environmentally advanced project in hand to develop a new district for 5000 people which has the active participa-tion of local inhabitants. The outcome will minimise energy, water and car use.

Freiburg‘s achievements in transport are already impres-sive. The City Council has a long-standing policy to actively promote measures to reduce car use. Cars are excluded from the city centre, making it a delight for pedestrians and cy-clists. Buses and trams are comfortable, frequent and relia-ble and integrated with the train system. Fares are kept low by subsidies from profits from the city‘s energy and water compa-nies. There are over 400 km of cycle paths in the town and its suburbs and there is a 30 kph

(18 mph) speed limit in residential areas. As a result of these measures the use

Daily Farmers‘ Market in Freiburg

of public transport and bicycles has steadily increased, reducing the number of journeys that would have been made by car. Freiburg‘s environmen-tal achievements re-ceive much attention in the world‘s press. Last year there were sub-stantial articles in "Time" magazine, the New York Times, the Financial Times, the Independent and the BBC. An article in ―The Observer‖ newspaper in 2008 asked ―Is this the greenest city in the world?‖. Last Decem-ber the city‘s Lord Mayor Dr Dieter Salo-mon participated in a meeting of about 100 Mayors from around the world as part of the UN Climate Change Con-ference in Copenhagen and talked about the action Freiburg is taking to reduce its carbon emissions.

The city‘s latest honour is to be named "European City of the Year" for 2010 by the UK‘s Academy of Urbanism. Established in 2006, the Academy‘s aims are to pro-mote high social, cultural, environmental and economic standards in the urban en-vironment.

Guildford is fortunate indeed to be twinned with Freiburg.

Peter Slade,

Chairman of the Guildford Freiburg Association For more information about the twinning and the Guildford Freiburg Association visit the Association’s website (www.surreycommunity.info/gfa/) or call the Associa-tion’s Chairman on 01483 531472 for information about possible visits. Freiburg’s website (www.freiburg.de) is also worth a look.

Easter 2009: Mayor Jennifer Jordan welcomes the man-ager of the visiting Freiburg boys‘ football team at the Guildhall. Photo G.F.A Newsletter

The Architecture Festival 2010

The Architecture Festival is a nationwide celebration of architecture which is held in June each year. Originally called Architecture Week the event is now in its four-teenth year. Nationally, the festival is co-ordinated by RIBA (Royal Institute of Brit-ish Architects). The events in Guildford are organised by the Guildford Society, De-sign and Heritage group. Architecture 2010 started with the Annual Lecture at the University of Surrey and is reported elsewhere in this Newsletter. The Festival included nine other events held during the week 20

th- 27

th June. The

programme contained talks and an exhibition – all held this year in the Guildford Institute – and external activities.

The photographic exhibition was assembled by the Guildford Photographic Society in partnership with the Design and Heritage group. The theme was ―A Celebration of Guildford‘s Architecture‖ and included a celebration of the Guildford Society‘s 75

th Anniversary. nominated Alongside these, there were pictures of the buildings

and projects for the Guildford Society biennial Design Awards 2010. The exhibition remained open until July 15

th.

Sanford Garage—contender for ―The People‘s Choice‖ prize. Photograph by Doug Scott

26

On the Sunday, Pat Gray-burn (see Architecture Lec-ture report) and Professor Stephen Baker, from the uni-versity, led an Architecture and Sculpture walk on the University campus, which was attended by 37 people. There were two events on the Tuesday. A lunch time talk by Doug Scott on ―How do we save Guildford‘s His-toric Streets?‖, attended by 25 people and an evening walk led by Michael Jeffrey to judge the town centre nominations for the Design Awards. This walk was at-tended by 23 people and concluded at the Star Inn in Quarry St, which has recent-ly been restored. On Wednesday, Chris Mansfield, Head of Economic Development at Guildford Borough Council, gave an interesting talk on current developments including Slyfield. This attracted 55 people. There were two events, again, on Thursday. A lunch time talk by Robin Stannard on ―Henry Woodyer, Gentleman Architect in Surrey‖: which attracted 30 people. And there was an evening car tour to view the out of town Design Award Nomi-nations, including the Surrey Sport Park and the Guildford School of Acting at the University: 20 people attended. On the final Sunday, Doug Scott led a walk exploring Guildford‘s historic streets. 17 people decided to come, despite 30 degree temperatures and clashing with the England v Germany World Cup football. Finally, the exhibition included a ballot box for the People‘s Choice, Design Award.

Doug Scott

Steamer Trading High Street Guildford Photo as before

A.G.M. 2010 Scrap Book

Lord Onslow prepares to cut the cake

The 75th Anniversary Cake.

28

Treasurer‘s Report

29

Chairman‘s Report

STOP PRESS +++ LATE NEWS +++ STOP PRESS +++

Auriol Earl reports: I was representing The Society as spectator at the meet-ing of the Executive Committee of the Guildford Borough Council on 15

th July.

Some decisions were made of great importance to The Society‘s recent cam-paigning work. First it was decided that the setts in Guildford High Street will be lifted, cleaned, re-laid and re-pointed. The work, costing up to £110.000, is to be car-ried out under the Council's Term Maintenance Contract for minor civil engineer-ing works and should be finished by Christmas. This money will not cover all the repairs necessary but will cover the most essential. This is a matter for rejoic-ing: see Newsletter Spring 2009. Secondly. The Tourist Information Centre is to be relocated to Guildford House and will occupy most of the High Street frontage. The Craft Shop will be moved to the ground floor of the Brew House (which is only half the width of the top floor). The café will remain for the moment and the Art Exhibitions will be in the rooms where they are normally held. The Borough Collection will be moved to the Woking Road Depot. The Society is glad of the fact that public access will be retained to all of this Grade 1-listed building. The Grade 2-listed former Thorpes Bookshop (170 High Street) is to be advertised for sale on a long lease to a commercial operator. These decisions have been reached on economic grounds: it is planned to spend £160,000 on setting up the TIC and refurbishing Guildford House. And finally, the Guildford Society will no doubt rejoice to read of the acceptance of the recommendation of council officers to withdraw the planning application for the Bedford Road surface car park (see Newsletters Spring 2009 & Winter 2009). And a further matter for rejoicing is agreed expenditure on studying a possible relocation of the Bus Station. The papers issued for those attending the meeting also included an 80 page report from Cushman and Wakefield entitled ―Town Centre Development Study‖ which makes interesting reading.

Auriol Earle

STOP PRESS +++ LATE NEWS +++ STOP PRESS +++

30

RECENT PLANNING APPLICATIONS

See the main article by the Planning Group. Note that the text of some of these applica-

tions has been moved to the web-site to save space here.

1 Supported applications 10/P/00180 The Star Inn, 2 Quarry Street Repair work. We wrote in support of the application as it was clear that a serious repair scheme was proposed for this Inn, one of Guildford's most prestigious heritage buildings. Both the exterior and the interior are of great interest and value and we expressed gratitude to the owners in taking such care with the works. (Approved) 10/P/00399 60-61 Quarry Street, Guildford Installation of new shop front. We warmly welcomed this application and agreed that it will enhance the charac-ter and appearance of the Conservation Area. We noted the fruitful discussions that were held with the Officers. (Approved) 2 Advertisement Applications 09/P/01720 17-20 Friary Street Advertisement consent for the display of in-ternally illuminated acrylic letters to front and rear elevations and other signage. We strongly objected to the proposed internally illuminated signage on the rear elevation of this property. There is, at present, no signage on this west elevation of the Friary Street development and to introduce any signage would be severely detrimental to the view across the River Wey and would set a very unfor-tunate precedent. (Council agreed with us and refused permission for the rear signage but approved the remainder) 09/P/01831 to 01836 Harpers Nightclub, Onslow Street Various signs and advertisements. We considered that the proposals were considerably more bla-tant and intrusive than the signage on other establishments in the Bridge Street conservation area. We thought that the quality of this area has been progressively eroded by the signage on Harpers Nightclub and the Quadrant, and that it is time to call a halt. 09/P/01831 - Retrospective application for advertisement consent for internally illuminated neon fascia lettering to replace existing Cafe Mambo signage. (Approved, despite officers concerns, because of previous appeal decisions) 09/P/01832 – Retrospective application for advertisement consent for internally illuminated stand up sign to roof. (Refused. Appeal lodged) 09/P/01833 – Retrospective application for advertisement consent for internally illuminated fascia sign to replace existing Bar Mambo signage fronting Onslow Street. (Approved, despite officers concerns, because of previous appeal deci-sions) 09/P/01834 – Retrospective application for advertisement consent for replace-ment internally illuminated fascia nightclub entrance sign on Bedford Road. (Refused. Appeal lodged)

31

09/P/01835 – Retrospective application for advertisement consent for replacement high level internally illuminated neon nightclub signage fronting Bedford Road. (Refused Appeal lodged) 09/P/01836 – Retrospective application for advertisement consent for replacement high level internally neon nightclub signage fronting Onslow Street. (Refused. Ap-peal lodged) 10/P/00138 Former Esso Garage, Woodbridge Road Advertisement Con-sent for several fascia signs and two totems. (Part approved and part refused. Our objections were upheld) 10/P/00388 14-16 Friary Street, Guildford Fascia signage and internally illu-minated projecting signs. (Part approved and part refused. Our objections were upheld) 3 Building Applications 09/P/01618 21 Swan Lane, Guildford Change of use from retail (Use Class A1) to adult amusement (gaming) centre. The Society took the view that such a change would be a totally inappropriate use within the primary shopping area of the town. (Refused. Appeal lodged and subsequently withdrawn) 09/P/01949 and 1950 2 Upper Edgeborough Road. Demolition of house and erection of 10 flats. We repeated our objections to a previous application (07/P/02163) and considered the proposal was to build much closer to the site bound-aries than before. We did not believe the proposal 'enhances' the character of the Waterden conservation area, or the 'green' approach into the town. The proposal was an over-development of the site, it provided too little open space, and thus that it was not in keeping with the character of the conservation area. (Refused. Appeal lodged) 09/P/02043 Land bounded by North St., Onslow St., & Leapale Rd. Guildford Application to extend the time limit for the implementation of 04/P/00090 ap-proved 23.12.04 outline application for comprehensive mixed use develop-ment. We wrote to advise that our objections to this application as scheduled in our letter of 6/2/4 still stood. In addition, we wished to see a pedestrian north-south right of way maintained through the site 24 hours per day all the year round in perpetuity. (Not yet decided) 09/P/02057 Sanitrux, Chapel farm Guildford Road Normandy. Consultation by SCC for use of site as materials recovery facility. (The planning officers agreed with our assessment and wrote a letter of objection) 10/P/00048 and 10/P/00049 49 20 Buryfields Conversion of existing buildings to residential and offices. (Refused)

32

10/P/00125 Pavement outside 66-68 High Street Mobile catering unit. In principle we are opposed to the permanent positioning of mobile catering units in the High Street: an intrusive and unwelcome presence incompatible with our outstandingly attractive High Street. We do however welcome the occasional street market. These operate satisfactorily under the 28 day rule and we there-fore objected to this proposal. (Refused). A further application was presented (10/P/00276) to which we also objected and objections were received from the Council's Design and Conservation team and Holy Trinity Amenity Group. This time the applicants then amended their appli-cation so that they sought permission to operate on Saturdays and Sundays only. (Approved) Another application (10/P/00596) was submitted for trading to be at weekends and Bank holidays. We again objected to this proposal. (Refused) 10/P/00285 1a & 1b Down Place Down Road Merrow Guildford Erection of block of 4 flats. (Withdrawn) 10/P/00615 Blanket Mill Pig Farm, Goose Rye Road, Worplesdon Change of use from agricultural land to ‘B2’. (Refused) 10/P/00659 Former DEFRA Site, Epsom Road Additional four bedroom house and garaging and parking. The squeezing in of one more house and of the extra garages and parking requires substantial reductions in the area of a dozen gardens to such an extent that these gardens will become unacceptably foreshortened (less than 6m deep). The consequence will be a gross diminution of the residential amenity of this part of the site. We suggested that if the devel-oper is keen to provide more parking he put some parking underground. (Refused) 10/P/00766 12 White Lion Walk, Guildford, GU1 Installation of new shop-fronts. The Society had no problem, in principle, over the proposals to incorpo-rate security shutters as part of this application but we objected to this applica-tion firstly because we took the view that the shutters should be of an ‗open‘ design and not of a ‗solid‘ design which would appear visually unattractive. Secondly we considered that in the interests of minimising the visual impact on North Street, the shutters on the doorway facing North Street should be located on the ‗inside‘ (rather than on the ‗outside‘) of the door. (The application was amended to take our concerns into account and approved) 10/P/00780 115 Epsom Road, Guildford, GU1 2LE Erection of two build-ings each to provide four 2 bed flats and one 3 bed flat. The planning histo-ry of this site will be a material consideration in assessing this application (an earlier planning appeal on this site allowed redevelopment to provide flats) but we advised we were against Epsom Road being dominated by new develop-ments of blocks of flats following the demolition of single dwellings. We suggest-

33

ed the Council should consider these proposals in the light of the emerging poli-cies of the new government. (Not yet decided) 10/P/00788 Sanford Garage, 60 Epsom Road, Guildford Change of use of car showroom and garage to shop (class A1). We had some concerns as to whether it is appropriate to introduce a shopping use in this area of Epsom Road when the town Centre shopping area does not extend beyond Jenner Road. We took the view that if an alternative use is being considered for this property it would be preferable to see this building occupied as offices. In addition we were concerned about the absence of any suitable access (for servicing) and the ab-sence of any meaningful off-street car parking (for customers). (Not yet decided) 10/P/00836 South West Surrey Masonic Centre at Guildford Weybourne House, Hitherbury Close, Guildford. Extension of the existing car park to provide an additional eleven car parking spaces. (Not yet decided) 4. Decisions on Applications Reported in Previous Newsletters 09/P/00817 8 Flower Walk, Guildford Erection of two dwellings . (Refused. Appeal lodged. Appeal dismissed) 09/P/00985 Tangley Place, Worplesdon Erection of 92 bed care home (Approved but subject to many conditions, some of which took into account our concerns) 09/P/01036 Stoughton Grange Junior School, Guildford Demolition of ex-isting school and erection of a sixty nine bed care facility (Approved) 09/P/01044 Sunnyside Clasford Bridge, Aldershot Road, Guildford SCC consultation re development of existing waste site as a Materials Re-covery Facility. (No objection) 09/P/01282, 1 & 2 Station View Phasing of construction of parking spaces. (Approved with our concerns being covered by condition 18)

John Wood

34

We extend a welcome to the following new members to The Guildford Society who have joined us since the last edition of the Newsletter was prepared.

Mr M V & Mrs A E Sinclair Karen & Stephen Atkinson Mr K Powell Vanda Maria Jay Mr John & Mrs Pauline Surrey Prof Bernie & Mrs Jane Cohen Dr Mary Alexander Mr & Mrs H A Jessett Mrs Elsa Langhorn & Mr Nathan Langhorn Mrs Iris Hawkins Miss B Batten Mr Gerald Bland Miss Greta A Willis Miss Janet Hilderley Prof Patrick J & Dr Grace Dowling Mrs Joy F Watson

PARTNERSHIP WITH THE NATIONAL TRUST Civic Voice has a strong partnership with the National Trust. We share a pas-sion for conserving and improving places for people. Free day access pass Individual members of all civic societies who join Civic Voice can receive the offer of a free day access pass. This will provide free access to any National Trust property during normal opening hours subject to a small number of re-strictions. The free pass is available to download by your members by using the follow-ing link www.civicvoice.org.uk/nationaltrustcivicvoiceoffer. The pass is trans-ferable and can be given to friends or family if a member is already a member of the National Trust. Where members do not have internet access a free day pass will also be available by sending a stamped addressed envelope to Civic Voice, Unit 101, 82 Wood Street, The Tea Factory, Liverpool L1 4DQ requesting one and providing contact details and the name of the group which is a member of Civ-ic Voice.

35

NOTICE

Memories of War

Local people and evacuees recount their memories of life in Send

and Ripley during World War II Published 2009. ISBN 978-0-

9562929-0-2 £8.00 See website:

http://www.sendandripleyhistorysociety.co.uk/

publications/pages/memoriesofwarpublication.html

Please keep in touch, let me know what you think

of the Newsletter:

newsletter@guildfordsociety.org.uk If you have

ideas for us, or copy to contribute to the next edi-

tion please send in by end October. We are always

seeking new material. Ed

36

BOARD

Heritage Day 2010

Heritage Day in the town centre this year will be Saturday 11 September. Heritage Day offers the opportunity to visit and explore many of the most interesting town centre properties that are not usu-ally available to the public. The Guildford Society will be assisting in this year‘s activities as always and we urge members who have an interest to give a few hours on the day in one of the proper-ties and perhaps in preparation for the event. If you can help please contact Gillian Cameron on 503172 or email her at

secretary@guildfordsociety.org.uk

Shalford Mill has its own flour

for sale.

We are happy to pass on the news that Shalford Mill has a new

marketing venture: its own Shalford Mill flour. It is a blend of

stone ground flours, with a yeast sachet included, and is spe-

cially created by Imbhams Farm Granary of Haslemere. It is

designed to be used in modern bread makers or to be hand

kneeded. 560gm size is £3.00.

37

THE GUILDFORD SOCIETY Committees and contacts Website address—www.guildfordsociety.org.uk

President The Earl of Onslow

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE 01483 Email:

Chairman Michael Jeffery 562007 chair@

Hon Secretary Gillian Cameron 503172 secretary@

Hon Treasurer Michael Penny 539484 treasurer@

Hon Minutes Secretary

Susan Stewart 569223

Vice Chairmen:

Planning Dr John Baylis planning@

D & H Auriol Earle design@

Transport Maurice Barham transport@

S & C David Bunting social@

Members Gerald Bland

Sheila Kirkland

Doug Scott

John Shorto

Merilyn Spier

Pauline Surrey

Martin Taplin

To email a committee member add their role as above to guildfordsociety.org.uk

Thus chair@guildfordsociety.org.uk

The Society works through a hierarchy of an Executive Committee and a set of sub-committees each chaired by one of the Vice Chairmen of the society. The sub-committees handle the detailed issues of their subject and raise significant issues for decision or resolution at the Executive. We find that ths method enables us to make good use of more volunteers’ time and increases the range of work the Soci-ety can undertake. Most communication is handled by email. We avoid duplica-tion and bureaucracy wherever possible.

38

PLANNING GROUP DESIGN AND HERITAGE GROUP

Chairman Dr John Baylis Chairman Auriol Earle

Members Graham Hibbert Gp. Secretary Joan Butler

Ian Macpherson Members Jean Bridger

David Ogilvie Elizabeth Cox

Martin Taplin Pauline Surrey

Amanda Mullarkey Vanda Jay

Susan Stewart Gillian Cameron

John Wood Sheila Kirkland

Malcolm Sinclair Doug Scott

Robin Stannard

TRANSPORT GROUP

Chairman Maurice Barham

Members Christopher Blow

John Jagger

Tim Langhorn

Bob Thomas

Dr Bibhas Neogi

SOCIAL AND COMMUNICATIONS GROUP

Chairman David Bunting

Gp Secretary Maureen Rivett

Members Gillian Cameron

Ralph Hill Website editor

Barbara Logan

David Smith Newsletter Editor

newsletter@

Susan Stewart

John Shorto Membership Secretary

If you would like to work with one of the Groups we would like to hear from you; just phone or email the appropriate group chairman or the Society Secretary via the website.

39