We believe that it is important that people are confident about the facts in the survey and the flyer. As such statements have been fact checked and cross referenced to Surrey County Council documents and statements. Set out below are the sources.
SURVEY QUESTIONS & SOURCES
Survey Question 1:
Information about survey respondent – no sources required
Survey Question 2:
Surrey County Council has said they estimated the scheme will lead to an additional 148 daily cyclists at a cost of £4.2m (c.£30,000 per cyclist). Do you believe this represents a good use of taxpayer money?
Sources:
"£4.2m"
Surrey County Council representatives publicly provided the cost of £4.2m at the public meeting at George Abbot school on 5 January 2023.
Surrey County Council employees have since confirmed that this remains the latest estimate at recent consultations.
"148 cyclists"
Surrey County Council’s published an expected 148 new daily cyclists as a result of the Scheme in March 2023 and have subsequently reiterated this number
"c.£30,000"
calculated using Surrey County Council’s published figure of an expected 148 new daily cyclists as a result of the Scheme.
£4.2m / 148 = £30,000 (rounded to 1 significant figure)
Survey Question 3:
Do you believe traffic currently on a “A” road (London Road) should be re-routed to residential roads (eg as proposed with Winterhill Way, Nightingale & Tormead Roads)?
Sources:
“A” road
London Road is the A3100
"Re-routing"
Surrey County Council’s Traffic Modelling report of October 2023 shows traffic being rerouted down residential roads. Figure 26 shows an increase of 113 AM trips in Tormead Road and an increase of 130 in Nightingale Road and Figure 25 shows an increase of 33 PM trips in Winterhill Way
https://burpham-activetravel.commonplace.is/en-GB/proposals/about-the-project/step1
Survey Question 4:
Do you believe Surrey County Council policy should be to increase or decrease congestion for motorists
Opinion question – no sources required
Survey Question 5:
From a safety and usage perspective are you comfortable with or concerned about changing pavements into shared pedestrian & cycleways? (as proposed for c.45% of Burpham stretch & outside Guildford High School)
Sources:
"Location"
Surrey County Council published plans for Sections 1 & 3. Available on consultation website and at drop-in consultations.
https://burpham-activetravel.commonplace.is/en-GB/proposals/about-the-project/step1
"45%"
Statistic included in Surrey County Council FAQ
https://www.surreycc.gov.uk/roads-and-transport/roadworks-and-maintenance/roadworks/burpham-active-travel#local
Survey Question 6:
Both right turn lanes at York Road will be removed. Surrey County Council believe this will force people onto other routes. Do you agree with removing these right turn lanes
Sources:
"Lane removal"
Surrey County Council published plans for Sections 3. Available on consultation website and at drop-in consultations.
https://burpham-activetravel.commonplace.is/en-GB/proposals/about-the-project/step1
"Forcing onto other routes"
Traffic Modelling report states how delays along the A3100 lead to fewer vehicles travelling along it and use other routes.
Surrey County Council representatives confirmed at the drop-in sessions that if people did not change their route then traffic congestion would become so bad that this is why motorists will be forced to change their routes
Survey Question 7:
In terms of improving cycling and pedestrian access in Guildford, do you believe upgrading the London Road cycleway is the right place to prioritise (given London Road is the safest of major routes into Guildford) or are there other routes or ways you would prefer to see addressed?
Sources:
"London Road safest of major routes"
Counts of serious injuries by route, sourced from Surrey Police data 1 Sep 2020 - 31 Aug 2023:
Cyclists & Pedestrian serious injuries
London Road 1
Epsom Road 2
Farnham Road 2
A281 4
A320 5
A323 onto A25 6
All Road user serious injuries
London Road 2
Epsom Road 5
Farnham Road 5
A281 8
A320 9
A323 onto A25 18
Survey Question 8:
Are you in favour of removing 16% of parking spaces next to Stoke Park to create the new cycleway?
Sources:
"16% removal"
Surrey County Council website states reduction from 57 to 48 bays
https://www.surreycc.gov.uk/roads-and-transport/roadworks-and-maintenance/roadworks/burpham-active-travel#local
Survey Question 9:
"Surrey County Council’s modelling indicates a 30%+ increase in journey times along London Road. Are you in favour of the additional delays and congestion?"
Sources:
"30%+ increase"
Surrey County Council Traffic Modelling Report Figures 28 & 29, published October 2023. Average of increase in average vehicle journey time across 4 scenarios shown (AM and PM, North and Southbound).
https://burpham-activetravel.commonplace.is/proposals/traffic-modelling/step11
Survey Question 10:
The first UK “Dutch” roundabout in Cambridge was criticised after accidents increased by 50% post adoption. Are you in favour of changing Boxgrove roundabout to a “Dutch” style roundabout?
Sources:
"criticism"
BBC article post introduction
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-65310167
https://www.cambridgeindependent.co.uk/news/dutch-style-roundabout-to-be-reviewed-as-cambridge-s-worst-r-9324618/
"50% increase"
BBC article stated an increase from 6 minor incidents in 2017-2019 to 10 since roundabout was completed in July 2020 (article dated 26 April 2023), of which 3 were serious
10 / 6 = 66.7%, so increase was more than 50% (wording should have been "over 50%")
Survey Question 11:
Do you believe this will have a positive or negative impact on local businesses?
Opinion question – no sources required
Survey Question 12:
Do you believe this will lead to an increase or decrease in your own journey times?
Opinion question – no sources required
Survey Question 13:
Do you believe this scheme should be cancelled or proceed?
Opinion question – no sources required
Survey Question 14:
Information about survey respondent – no sources required
FLYER STATEMENTS & SOURCES
Statement:
"Surrey CC Acknowledges:
Scheme Creates Increased Congestion for Guildford"
Sources:
"Increased Congestion"
Same as Survey Question 9 re increase in journey times.
Surrey County Council representatives have also confirmed increased congestion at the drop-in sessions.
Statement:
"18 months of implementation"
Surrey County Council designs for Sections 1,2 and 3.
A total of 80 weeks = 18 months and 2 weeks. 24 weeks for Section 1. 21 weeks for Section 2. 35 weeks for Section 3
https://burpham-activetravel.commonplace.is/proposals/section-3/step1
"6 months of intermittent night time closures"
Surrey County Council designs for Sections 1,2 and 3
Night time closures from 8pm to 5am:
Section 1: 2 weeks full closure & 6 weeks one-way
Section 2: 21 weeks partial closures
Section 3: 11 weeks 5 days full closure & 6 weeks one way or two-way lights
https://burpham-activetravel.commonplace.is/proposals/section-3/step1
"Longer, slower journeys"
same as Survey Question 9: 30%+ increase
Also longer in distance as re-routing increases distance travelled in most instances
Statement:
Surrey CC is unwilling to provide current Costs, but previously stated as £4.2m – or c.£30,000 per additional cyclist
Sources:
"£4.2m" same as Survey Question 2 source
"£30,000" same as Survey Question 2 source
"Unwilling to provide"
Freedom of Information requests have been made to Surrey County Council to ask for cost information and prior drafts yet they have refused to provide cost information.
Statement:
Predicted an increase in cycling uptake of less than 1% of all London Road users
Sources:
"Less than 1% cycling uptake"
Calculated as 148 new cyclists / 19,228 daily vehicle trips on London Road
148 / 19,228 = 0.77%
Figures in calculation sourced as
"148" new daily cyclists: Source as per Survey Question 2
"19,228" London road users:
London Road 5 day average flows from a survey in May 2021.
Provided by a Surrey County Council Active Travel Programme Manager on 13 April 2023
Statement:
Traffic Modelling report states scheme design increases London Road congestion:
Sources:
"Increases London Road Congestion"
Same as Survey Question 9 re increase in journey times.
Surrey County Council representatives have also confirmed increased congestion at the drop-in sessions.
"Re-routing"
Same as Survey Question 3. Additional roads included compared to Survey, but can be seen in same Figures of the Surrey County Council Traffic Modelling Report
"Rat-runs"
Specifically highlighted in conclusion of Surrey County Council Traffic Modelling Report
"Traffic Light phasing potentially further delays and congestion"
Surrey County Council changed their original decision to ban right turns at York Road (included in original Traffic Modelling report). They subsequently published an addendum which notes they need to do further work and have not yet conducted a microsimulation model assessment. Concerns have been raised with Surrey County Council abut whether the current modelling has properly captured the fact that there are multiple schools nearby and that traffic may not be able to reroute as currently modelled. In that instance, further delays and congestion could occur.
https://burpham-activetravel.commonplace.is/en-GB/proposals/about-the-project/step1
Statement:
A controversial “Dutch style” roundabout at Boxgrove; Cambridge design saw 50% accident increase
Sources:
Same as Survey Question 10
Statement:
Cycle tracks at York Road and London Road junction will remove 2 right turn lanes
Sources:
Same as Survey Question 6
Statement:
Cycle tracks remove 9 parking spaces beside Stoke Park, remaining ones narrower than many UK car widths, alongside a carriageway narrower than at present
Sources:
"Removal of 9 spaces"
Same as Survey Question 8
"Narrower than many UK car widths"
Surrey County Council design for Section 3 shows a parking width of 1.8m for the parking spaces
https://burpham-activetravel.commonplace.is/proposals/section-3/step1
Many UK cars are now wider, especially SUVs. The following are published widths of two examples:
VW Toureg 1.984m, BMW X5 2.004m
"Carriageway narrower"
Surrey County Council plans for Section 3 indicate space from existing carriageway will be used for a dedicated cycleway, therefore reducing the width compared to the width at present.
https://burpham-activetravel.commonplace.is/proposals/section-3/step1
Statement:
Design uses many shared pedestrian and cycle paths. Guidance material says “a last resort” 45% of Burpham stretch and extensive strtch outside Guildford High School share
Sources:
"Shared paths"
Surrey County Council designs for Sections 1 and 3
"45% and Guildford High School stretch"
Same as Survey Question 5
“a last resort” guidance
“Shared use routes in streets with high pedestrian or cyclist flows should not be used.” Department for Transport document titled “Cycle Infrastructure Design”, part 1.6.2 (on p.9)
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/cycle-infrastructure-design-ltn-120
Statement:
Carbon emission reduction aim may be compromised by longer, slower journeys
Sources:
"reduction may be compromised"
A calculation has been made apply the delays stated in Surrey Council’s Modelling report to journey statistics provided in that modelling report, sourced from the 3 June 2016 Surrey County Council Model Development Validation report and A3100 traffic flows supplied by Surrey County Council. The daily figures have been multiplied by 365 to get an annual figure
This produces a figure of an extra 131,839 hours of vehicle journey time.
Department for Transport guidance indicates the reduction in vehicle trips due to cycling is only 11% (AMAT 3.26), which means only 16 fewer vehicle trips arise from 148 additional cylists (148 x 11% = 16).
The emissions from the additional vehicle time would appear to exceed any potential benefits and therefore actually increase not decrease emissions and harm not help Surrey County Council’s target of net zero by 2050.
"Longer, slower journeys"
same as Survey Question 9 re 30%+ increase
Also longer in distance as re-routing increases distance travelled in most instances
Statement:
Surrey County Council’s Leader committed not to proceed against the wishes of a majority of the public
Sources:
Commitment made by Tim Oliver, Chair of Surrey County Council, at 5 January 2023 meeting at George Abbot school
SURVEY QUESTIONS & SOURCES
Survey Question 1:
Information about survey respondent – no sources required
Survey Question 2:
Surrey County Council has said they estimated the scheme will lead to an additional 148 daily cyclists at a cost of £4.2m (c.£30,000 per cyclist). Do you believe this represents a good use of taxpayer money?
Sources:
"£4.2m"
Surrey County Council representatives publicly provided the cost of £4.2m at the public meeting at George Abbot school on 5 January 2023.
Surrey County Council employees have since confirmed that this remains the latest estimate at recent consultations.
"148 cyclists"
Surrey County Council’s published an expected 148 new daily cyclists as a result of the Scheme in March 2023 and have subsequently reiterated this number
"c.£30,000"
calculated using Surrey County Council’s published figure of an expected 148 new daily cyclists as a result of the Scheme.
£4.2m / 148 = £30,000 (rounded to 1 significant figure)
Survey Question 3:
Do you believe traffic currently on a “A” road (London Road) should be re-routed to residential roads (eg as proposed with Winterhill Way, Nightingale & Tormead Roads)?
Sources:
“A” road
London Road is the A3100
"Re-routing"
Surrey County Council’s Traffic Modelling report of October 2023 shows traffic being rerouted down residential roads. Figure 26 shows an increase of 113 AM trips in Tormead Road and an increase of 130 in Nightingale Road and Figure 25 shows an increase of 33 PM trips in Winterhill Way
https://burpham-activetravel.commonplace.is/en-GB/proposals/about-the-project/step1
Survey Question 4:
Do you believe Surrey County Council policy should be to increase or decrease congestion for motorists
Opinion question – no sources required
Survey Question 5:
From a safety and usage perspective are you comfortable with or concerned about changing pavements into shared pedestrian & cycleways? (as proposed for c.45% of Burpham stretch & outside Guildford High School)
Sources:
"Location"
Surrey County Council published plans for Sections 1 & 3. Available on consultation website and at drop-in consultations.
https://burpham-activetravel.commonplace.is/en-GB/proposals/about-the-project/step1
"45%"
Statistic included in Surrey County Council FAQ
https://www.surreycc.gov.uk/roads-and-transport/roadworks-and-maintenance/roadworks/burpham-active-travel#local
Survey Question 6:
Both right turn lanes at York Road will be removed. Surrey County Council believe this will force people onto other routes. Do you agree with removing these right turn lanes
Sources:
"Lane removal"
Surrey County Council published plans for Sections 3. Available on consultation website and at drop-in consultations.
https://burpham-activetravel.commonplace.is/en-GB/proposals/about-the-project/step1
"Forcing onto other routes"
Traffic Modelling report states how delays along the A3100 lead to fewer vehicles travelling along it and use other routes.
Surrey County Council representatives confirmed at the drop-in sessions that if people did not change their route then traffic congestion would become so bad that this is why motorists will be forced to change their routes
Survey Question 7:
In terms of improving cycling and pedestrian access in Guildford, do you believe upgrading the London Road cycleway is the right place to prioritise (given London Road is the safest of major routes into Guildford) or are there other routes or ways you would prefer to see addressed?
Sources:
"London Road safest of major routes"
Counts of serious injuries by route, sourced from Surrey Police data 1 Sep 2020 - 31 Aug 2023:
Cyclists & Pedestrian serious injuries
London Road 1
Epsom Road 2
Farnham Road 2
A281 4
A320 5
A323 onto A25 6
All Road user serious injuries
London Road 2
Epsom Road 5
Farnham Road 5
A281 8
A320 9
A323 onto A25 18
Survey Question 8:
Are you in favour of removing 16% of parking spaces next to Stoke Park to create the new cycleway?
Sources:
"16% removal"
Surrey County Council website states reduction from 57 to 48 bays
https://www.surreycc.gov.uk/roads-and-transport/roadworks-and-maintenance/roadworks/burpham-active-travel#local
Survey Question 9:
"Surrey County Council’s modelling indicates a 30%+ increase in journey times along London Road. Are you in favour of the additional delays and congestion?"
Sources:
"30%+ increase"
Surrey County Council Traffic Modelling Report Figures 28 & 29, published October 2023. Average of increase in average vehicle journey time across 4 scenarios shown (AM and PM, North and Southbound).
https://burpham-activetravel.commonplace.is/proposals/traffic-modelling/step11
Survey Question 10:
The first UK “Dutch” roundabout in Cambridge was criticised after accidents increased by 50% post adoption. Are you in favour of changing Boxgrove roundabout to a “Dutch” style roundabout?
Sources:
"criticism"
BBC article post introduction
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-65310167
https://www.cambridgeindependent.co.uk/news/dutch-style-roundabout-to-be-reviewed-as-cambridge-s-worst-r-9324618/
"50% increase"
BBC article stated an increase from 6 minor incidents in 2017-2019 to 10 since roundabout was completed in July 2020 (article dated 26 April 2023), of which 3 were serious
10 / 6 = 66.7%, so increase was more than 50% (wording should have been "over 50%")
Survey Question 11:
Do you believe this will have a positive or negative impact on local businesses?
Opinion question – no sources required
Survey Question 12:
Do you believe this will lead to an increase or decrease in your own journey times?
Opinion question – no sources required
Survey Question 13:
Do you believe this scheme should be cancelled or proceed?
Opinion question – no sources required
Survey Question 14:
Information about survey respondent – no sources required
FLYER STATEMENTS & SOURCES
Statement:
"Surrey CC Acknowledges:
Scheme Creates Increased Congestion for Guildford"
Sources:
"Increased Congestion"
Same as Survey Question 9 re increase in journey times.
Surrey County Council representatives have also confirmed increased congestion at the drop-in sessions.
Statement:
- 18 months of implementation
- 6 months of intermittent London Road night time closures
- Slower or longer journeys afterwards
"18 months of implementation"
Surrey County Council designs for Sections 1,2 and 3.
A total of 80 weeks = 18 months and 2 weeks. 24 weeks for Section 1. 21 weeks for Section 2. 35 weeks for Section 3
https://burpham-activetravel.commonplace.is/proposals/section-3/step1
"6 months of intermittent night time closures"
Surrey County Council designs for Sections 1,2 and 3
Night time closures from 8pm to 5am:
Section 1: 2 weeks full closure & 6 weeks one-way
Section 2: 21 weeks partial closures
Section 3: 11 weeks 5 days full closure & 6 weeks one way or two-way lights
https://burpham-activetravel.commonplace.is/proposals/section-3/step1
"Longer, slower journeys"
same as Survey Question 9: 30%+ increase
Also longer in distance as re-routing increases distance travelled in most instances
Statement:
Surrey CC is unwilling to provide current Costs, but previously stated as £4.2m – or c.£30,000 per additional cyclist
Sources:
"£4.2m" same as Survey Question 2 source
"£30,000" same as Survey Question 2 source
"Unwilling to provide"
Freedom of Information requests have been made to Surrey County Council to ask for cost information and prior drafts yet they have refused to provide cost information.
Statement:
Predicted an increase in cycling uptake of less than 1% of all London Road users
Sources:
"Less than 1% cycling uptake"
Calculated as 148 new cyclists / 19,228 daily vehicle trips on London Road
148 / 19,228 = 0.77%
Figures in calculation sourced as
"148" new daily cyclists: Source as per Survey Question 2
"19,228" London road users:
London Road 5 day average flows from a survey in May 2021.
Provided by a Surrey County Council Active Travel Programme Manager on 13 April 2023
Statement:
Traffic Modelling report states scheme design increases London Road congestion:
- Traffic will re-route into other routes, creating rat-runs and displaced congestion (Nightingale Road, Winterhill Way, Tormead Road, Cranley Road, New Inn Lane, Epsom Road, Glendale Drive & others)
- Essential extra traffic light phasing potentially adds to further delays and congestion
Sources:
"Increases London Road Congestion"
Same as Survey Question 9 re increase in journey times.
Surrey County Council representatives have also confirmed increased congestion at the drop-in sessions.
"Re-routing"
Same as Survey Question 3. Additional roads included compared to Survey, but can be seen in same Figures of the Surrey County Council Traffic Modelling Report
"Rat-runs"
Specifically highlighted in conclusion of Surrey County Council Traffic Modelling Report
"Traffic Light phasing potentially further delays and congestion"
Surrey County Council changed their original decision to ban right turns at York Road (included in original Traffic Modelling report). They subsequently published an addendum which notes they need to do further work and have not yet conducted a microsimulation model assessment. Concerns have been raised with Surrey County Council abut whether the current modelling has properly captured the fact that there are multiple schools nearby and that traffic may not be able to reroute as currently modelled. In that instance, further delays and congestion could occur.
https://burpham-activetravel.commonplace.is/en-GB/proposals/about-the-project/step1
Statement:
A controversial “Dutch style” roundabout at Boxgrove; Cambridge design saw 50% accident increase
Sources:
Same as Survey Question 10
Statement:
Cycle tracks at York Road and London Road junction will remove 2 right turn lanes
Sources:
Same as Survey Question 6
Statement:
Cycle tracks remove 9 parking spaces beside Stoke Park, remaining ones narrower than many UK car widths, alongside a carriageway narrower than at present
Sources:
"Removal of 9 spaces"
Same as Survey Question 8
"Narrower than many UK car widths"
Surrey County Council design for Section 3 shows a parking width of 1.8m for the parking spaces
https://burpham-activetravel.commonplace.is/proposals/section-3/step1
Many UK cars are now wider, especially SUVs. The following are published widths of two examples:
VW Toureg 1.984m, BMW X5 2.004m
"Carriageway narrower"
Surrey County Council plans for Section 3 indicate space from existing carriageway will be used for a dedicated cycleway, therefore reducing the width compared to the width at present.
https://burpham-activetravel.commonplace.is/proposals/section-3/step1
Statement:
Design uses many shared pedestrian and cycle paths. Guidance material says “a last resort” 45% of Burpham stretch and extensive strtch outside Guildford High School share
Sources:
"Shared paths"
Surrey County Council designs for Sections 1 and 3
"45% and Guildford High School stretch"
Same as Survey Question 5
“a last resort” guidance
“Shared use routes in streets with high pedestrian or cyclist flows should not be used.” Department for Transport document titled “Cycle Infrastructure Design”, part 1.6.2 (on p.9)
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/cycle-infrastructure-design-ltn-120
Statement:
Carbon emission reduction aim may be compromised by longer, slower journeys
Sources:
"reduction may be compromised"
A calculation has been made apply the delays stated in Surrey Council’s Modelling report to journey statistics provided in that modelling report, sourced from the 3 June 2016 Surrey County Council Model Development Validation report and A3100 traffic flows supplied by Surrey County Council. The daily figures have been multiplied by 365 to get an annual figure
This produces a figure of an extra 131,839 hours of vehicle journey time.
Department for Transport guidance indicates the reduction in vehicle trips due to cycling is only 11% (AMAT 3.26), which means only 16 fewer vehicle trips arise from 148 additional cylists (148 x 11% = 16).
The emissions from the additional vehicle time would appear to exceed any potential benefits and therefore actually increase not decrease emissions and harm not help Surrey County Council’s target of net zero by 2050.
"Longer, slower journeys"
same as Survey Question 9 re 30%+ increase
Also longer in distance as re-routing increases distance travelled in most instances
Statement:
Surrey County Council’s Leader committed not to proceed against the wishes of a majority of the public
Sources:
Commitment made by Tim Oliver, Chair of Surrey County Council, at 5 January 2023 meeting at George Abbot school