Guildford Town Centre Bus Study...Guildford Town Centre Bus Study Stage Two Report: Options Appraisal 249012-00/JK Final | 14 November 2016 This report takes into account the particular

Surrey County Council and Guildford Borough Council

Guildford Town Centre Bus Study

Stage Two Report: Options Appraisal

249012-00/JK

Final | 14 November 2016

This report takes into account the particular

instructions and requirements of our client.

It is not intended for and should not be relied

upon by any third party and no responsibility

is undertaken to any third party.

Job number 249012-00

Ove Arup & Partners Ltd

13 Fitzroy Street

London

W1T 4BQ

United Kingdom

www.arup.com

249012-00/JK | Final | 14 November 2016

\\GLOBAL.ARUP.COM\LONDON\PTG\ICL-JOBS\249000\24901200 GUILDFORD TOWN CENTRE BUS STUDY\4 INTERNAL PROJECT DATA\4-05 ARUP REPORTS\STAGE 2 OUTPUT 2\20161114 STAGE 2 OPTIONS

APPRAISAL FINAL.DOCX

Document Verification

Job title Guildford Town Centre Bus Study Job number

249012-00

Document title Stage Two Report: Options Appraisal File reference

Document ref 249012-00/JK

Revision Date Filename

Draft for

Review

25

August

2016

Description Draft for Review

Prepared by Checked by Approved by

Name Joanna Kesson

Rebecca Chung Joanna Kesson Stephen Bennett

Signature

Final 14 Nov

2016

Filename Description Final


Name Joanna Kesson

Rebecca Chung Joanna Kesson Stephen Bennett

Signature

Filename Description


Name

Signature

Filename

Description


Name

Signature

Issue Document Verification with Document

Surrey County Council and Guildford Borough Council Guildford Town Centre Bus Study



\\GLOBAL.ARUP.COM\LONDON\PTG\ICL-JOBS\249000\24901200 GUILDFORD TOWN CENTRE BUS STUDY\4 INTERNAL PROJECT DATA\4-05 ARUP REPORTS\STAGE 2

OUTPUT 2\20161114 STAGE 2 OPTIONS APPRAISAL FINAL.DOCX

Contents Page

1 Introduction 1

2 Methodology 2

2.1 Approach 2

2.2 Measures of Evaluation 2

2.3 Incorporating Stakeholder Engagement 14

2.4 Appraisal Criteria 16

3 Identification of Options 20

3.1 Option 1: Bedford Road Car Park 23

3.2 Option 2: Dolphin House 23

3.3 Option 3: Guildford Railway Station 24

3.4 Option 4: The Former Farnham Road Bus Station 25

3.5 Option 5: Friary Interchange 25

3.6 Option 6: On-Street Bus Facilities 26

3.7 Option 7: Debenhams Site 26

3.8 Option 8: Arriva Depot 26

3.9 Option 9: Car Park Sites 27

3.10 Option 10: Park and Ride Locations 28

3.11 Summary of Options 30

4 Appraisal Results 31

4.1 Appraisal 31

4.2 Findings 34

5 Recommendation 37

5.1 On-Street Stops Plus Off-Street Layover at Bedford Wharf 37

5.2 On-Street Stops Plus Off-Street Layover at Arriva Depot 43

5.3 Other Potential Layover Options 48

5.4 Summary 51

6 Conclusion 52

Tables

Table 1 Stakeholder comments

Table 2 Appraisal criteria

Table 3 Options and space provided

Table 4 Guildford Bus Option Appraisals






Table 5 Summary of bays provided

Figures

Figure 1 Summary of boarding and alighting surveys

Figure 2 Guildford cycle routes

Figure 3 Cycle accidents in Guildford town centre

Figure 4 Proposed taxi ranks in Guildford town centre

Figure 5 Pedestrian routes

Figure 6 Pedestrians accidents across Guildford town centre

Figure 7 Location of potential options

Figure 8 Park and ride sites

Figure 9 Potential routes to terminate at Park and Ride sites

Figure 10 Conceptual sketch of bus layover facility at Bedford Road car park

Figure 11 Practical examples of saw-tooth and loop arrangement

Figure 12 Indicative routings at Bedford Road car park - inbound

Figure 13 Indicative routings at Bedford Road car park – outbound

Figure 14 Concept sketch of layover at the Arriva depot

Figure 15 Arriva depot and surrounding area

Figure 16 Indicative routings for facility at the Arriva depot – inbound

Figure 17 Indicative routings for facility at the Arriva depot – outbound

Figure 18 Indicative routings for Guildford rail station – inbound

Figure 19 Indicative routings for Guildford rail station – outbound

Appendices

Appendix A

Survey Results

Appendix B

Conceptual Sketches






Page 1

1 Introduction

Stage Two of the Guildford Town Centre Bus Study builds on the work done in

Stage One to identify the existing conditions and stakeholder requirements for any

change.

The Stage One Technical Note on Existing Conditions identified that a maximum

of 19 bus bays are used in the peak of the peak in The Friary bus station. This is a

combination of layover bays and bus stops for passengers to board and alight.

Analysis has shown that up to 14 different bays are used informally for layover in

the current bus station, although there are only six official layover bays. The Stage

One Technical Needs Note identified the requirements of operators and other

interest groups for the new stop and stand locations in the town centre – in terms

of the locations but also the space and associated facilities required.

The following sections of this report outline the potential new locations as a long

list. These were then appraised according to their impact on bus passengers, non-

bus users, bus operations and the wider strategic objectives held by Guildford

Borough Council and Surrey County Council. The options appraisal narrowed

down the possible alternative locations in terms of how well they met those

criteria, but also according to the availability of the land for development of a bus

facility. This process was undertaken in collaboration with the client team.

The presentation of several options provides GBC and SCC with assurance of a

workable solution for alternative bus facilities to the current Friary bus station,

which aims to unlock development at the current site.






Page 2

2 Methodology

2.1 Approach

This section describes the approach to evaluating the options for relocated bus

facilities in Guildford town centre, including measures of evaluation and their

corresponding methodologies.

The evaluation framework was developed by Arup and was presented to

Guildford Borough Council (GBC) and Surrey County Council (SCC) on 15 July

2016. The appraisal categories were discussed and agreed at the client meeting on

27 July 2016.

The development of the alternative locations was based on two steps. The first

step was a preliminary screening of all alternatives at a high level, using criteria

agreed with the client team. Following this, several locations were carried forward

into a formal review and evaluation, after their availability and land ownership

were established with SCC and GBC.

Detail of the alternatives and workable solutions are described in Sections 3 to 5

of this report. Ultimately, further and more in-depth analysis of the solution would

be required as the project is carried forward into detailed design.

2.2 Measures of Evaluation

The evaluation assessed the performance of each alternative bus facility with

respect to the following major areas of potential impact:

Passengers;

Non-bus users;

Bus operations; and

Wider strategic objectives.

With a total of 23 metrics (and two metrics on land availability and cost), the

evaluation includes both qualitative and quantitative measures. The primary data

sources for evaluation of the options for relocated facilities include:

Conceptual sketches of alternatives to indicate efficient layouts achievable;

Existing demand at bus stops around Guildford town centre and The Friary

bus station;

Existing land uses;

Wider strategic objectives and previous studies (including Guildford Town

Centre Highway Assessment Study1);

Performance of other bus facility designs all around UK and the world; and

1 WSP | Parsons Brinkerhoff. June 2016. Guildford Town Centre Highway Assessment Study –

Paramics Initial Scheme Testing – Phasing Plan 1 and Pedestrianised Bridge Street.






Page 3

Stakeholder engagement.

It should be noted that the Land Availability and Ownership criteria were

evaluated separately from the main assessment, as a location could score well in

theory, but if it were not available for development as a bus facility then it could

not be taken forward. The evaluation of this criterion was also refined in an

iterative process and is based on multiple discussions with GBC and SCC.

The following sections describe the methodology for each of the major evaluation

criteria: impact on bus passengers, non-bus users, bus operations, and wider

strategic objectives. These criteria were used to score a long list of options

identified. The long list was then reduced to a short list through consultation with

SCC and GBC about site constraints – namely, their availability for development

as a bus facility, and land ownership. Therefore not all sites identified in Section 3

were taken forward as recommended options in Section 5.

2.2.1 Bus Passenger

The purpose of this evaluation is to measure the benefits or disbenefits of options

on the bus passengers’ experience. This experience is measured by how accessible

the option is to the town centre retail core, the change in overall bus journey

times, the ease of bus-to-bus / bus-to-rail interchange, proximity to existing

boarding and alighting points, and potential for bus passenger facilities.

At this stage of the process, bus passenger experience is measured both

qualitatively and quantitatively. For accessibility to the Town Centre retail core

(1-1), the option’s performance was measured by calculating the total direct

distance between the main retail core (assumed to be the junction of North Street /

High Street) and the bus facility option. The closer the distance to the town centre

core, the more convenient it is for bus passengers to access retail facilities as well

as offices for employment purposes.

For change in overall bus journey times (1-2), this criterion is a high level

quantitative review of the potential strategic bus routing resulting from the revised

bus facility location. If the new location results in a substantial rerouting of buses

with an increase in bus passengers’ journey time, it is scored as a disbenefit to

passengers, compared with the existing conditions.

For ease of bus-to-bus interchange (1-3) and bus-to-rail interchange (1-4), these

criteria are a quantitative assessment of the options’ proximity to intermodal

connectivity, namely other buses and rail services. The bus-to-bus interchange

evaluation criterion reviews how close bus stops are to each other to enable bus-

to-bus interchange. The closer the bus stops are, the easier it is for bus passengers

to transfer between bus routes. The bus-to-rail interchange evaluation criterion

reviews how close the bus stops are to rail services at Guildford rail station.

The criteria 1.5 (proximity to existing busiest boarding points) and 1-6 (proximity

to existing busiest alighting points) compare the potential new bus facility

locations with existing bus passenger demand patterns. The purpose of these

evaluation criteria is to ensure that the new locations would support the existing

passenger demand patterns. Demand patterns are informed by surveys undertaken






Page 4

on two ‘typical’ weekdays at all stops across the town centre, including the bus

station. The detailed survey results supporting the evaluation are included in

Appendix A. A summary of results is included in Figure 1. It should be noted

that the surveys were undertaken in mid-July when university activity would be

lower and therefore bus passenger trip numbers may be lower than during

university term time. The bus operators have also provided passenger data to

further support the evaluation, which has been used to validate the survey results.2

The last criterion in this category is the potential for facilities that are safe,

secure, and legible for passengers to access and wait (1-7). This is a qualitative

assessment that reviewed the space afforded at the location for consolidated and

high quality passenger waiting facilities, as well as the surrounding environment

(i.e. existing lighting, active uses after dark, footway widths).

2 Ligertwood, David. (17 June 2016). Stagecoach PAX Data. Email.

Ligertwood, David (6 July 2016). *Confidential: FW: ETM data – Commercially Confidential

Safeguard PAX data. Email






Page 5

Figure 1 Summary of boarding and alighting surveys

2.2.2 Impact on Non-Bus Users

The purpose of this evaluation is to measure the impacts each of the proposed

alternatives has on non-bus users. Non-bus users have been identified as: cyclists,

taxis, delivery and servicing vehicles, and pedestrians. Overall, this measure was

assessed qualitatively through a review of council plans for the area, research into

accident records and discussions with SCC about road safety issues in the area,

and stakeholder engagement with non-bus user groups.

The impact on cyclists was measured by appraising the proposed location’s

compatibility with the existing and proposed Guildford Borough Cycling Plan

(and Surrey Cycling Strategy), as well as feedback from cycle groups through

Guildford Bus Boarding and Alighting Surveys

Two surveys were undertaken on 12 July and 14 July 2016, covering all stops across

Guildford town centre including the bus station. The survey purpose was to understand the

volumes of passengers boarding and alighting at stops across Guildford town centre

(including the bus station) in a typical weekday. The surveyors manually counted the

number of boarders and alighters at each stop from 07:00 to 19:00. The following results

were found:

At The Friary bus station, on the survey day there were a total 4,321 passengers

alighting and 5,193 passengers boarding across the day - more than all other surveyed

bus stops in the wider town centre combined.

The busiest boarding stops were stop 1 in the bus station (427 passengers) and Guildford

Park Road northbound (417 passengers). The busiest alighting stops were the

unnumbered alighting stop in The Friary bus station (1671 passengers) and North Street

westbound (927 passengers).

Peak boarding and alighting times vary by bus stop location and by route serving the

stop. Although there is a general trend for the alighting peak to occur in the AM and

boarding peak to occur in the PM, as you would expect with a town centre attracting

trips, there are notable exceptions:

Guildford Park Road n/b has peak boarding in the AM. This could be due to passengers

arriving at the rail station travelling to the hospital or university by bus, or due to

demand from local residents to the hospital or university.

Stand 22 in the bus station has its alighting peak in the PM which is probably due to ease

of use by bus drivers, compared with using the designated alighting point.

Park & Ride passengers make up approximately 20% of all boarding and alighting at the

bus station.

Routes with the highest boarding and alighting on the survey day were the 200 (to/from

Artington Park & Ride), KITE (to/from Aldershot), 5 and 4 (to/from Royal Surrey

Hospital / Park Barn); and 26 (to/from Stoughton, Royal Surrey Hospital, and University

of Surrey).

More details of the survey can be found in Appendix A of this report.






Page 6

stakeholder engagement. Cycle-related accident data obtained from the SCC Road

Safety Team for the period between 2011 and 2015 was also taken consideration

to identify the high-risk areas and how they relate to the proposed options. Figure

2 illustrates the existing and proposed bicycle routes near Guildford town centre.

Figure 3 shows the cycle-related accidents that occurred around Guildford town

centre from 2011 to 2015.

The impact on taxi stands was measured by how compatible the option would be

with new taxi rank provision in Guildford. These six new taxi ranks were

approved by Guildford Borough Council’s Executive on 30 May 2016 and their

proposed locations are shown in Figure 4.

For the impact on delivery and servicing arrangements in the town centre, each of

the alternatives was assessed based on compatibility with existing and anticipated

on-street delivery and servicing arrangements. This included a desktop review of

the existing on-street arrangements and future opportunity areas identified in the

Guildford Draft Local Plan that may require on-street delivery and servicing

arrangements (GBC, 24 May 2016). Discussions with SCC’s Road Safety Team

also informed this appraisal.

Similar to the impact on cyclists, the impact on pedestrians was measured by how

the proposed option relates to pedestrian desire lines and infrastructure to support

pedestrian routes to/from the site option. The existing pedestrianised street and

pedestrian paths are illustrated in Figure 5. In addition, accident data from the

SCC Road Safety Team detailing the pedestrian-related accidents between 2011

and 2015 was also taken into consideration when assessing locations within this

category. This is shown in Figure 6.






Page 7

Fig

ure

2 G

uil

dfo

rd c

ycl

e ro

ute

s






Page 8

Fig

ure

3 C

ycl

e ac

cid

ents

in G

uil

dfo

rd t

ow

n c

entr

e

NB

Wher

e a

nu

mb

er o

f ac

cid

ents

are

co

nce

ntr

ated

, th

ey a

re g

rouped

(e.

g.

‘2’)






Page 9

Fig

ure

4 P

rop

ose

d t

axi

ran

ks

in

Gu

ildfo

rd t

ow

n c

entr

e






Page 10

Fig

ure

5 P

edes

tria

n r

oute

s






Page 11

Fig

ure

6 P

edes

tria

ns

acci

den

ts a

cross

Guil

dfo

rd t

ow

n c

entr

e






Page 12

2.2.3 Bus Operations

The purpose of this evaluation measure is to assess the benefits of the proposed

locations on overall bus operations and performance. Bus operations are measured

by various factors including: changes to bus mileage and run time, bus capacity

availability, access to driver facilities, safety and ease of bus manoeuvres,

opportunity for business expansion, and the impact of construction on existing bus

operations.

The first evaluation criterion in this category is Changes to Mileage and Run Time

(3-1). Similar to the high level quantitative review for criterion 1-2, this

evaluation reviewed the potential bus routing for all options to determine the

change to route alignment and bus run times between the ‘business as usual’

scenario (existing situation) and new alternative bus facilities.

In order to determine the amount of space available at the different locations, we

undertook an exercise to draw up conceptual sketches of the most efficient

layouts. Evaluation criteria 3-2 to 3-4 (bus capacity available for now and the

future, access to driver facilities, ease and safety of manoeuvres accessing and

egressing the bays) were measured through a review of these conceptual drawings

prepared for each of the options. Although the design of facilities may differ in the

final schemes, concept sketches were a useful tool in investigating how the bus

facilities could operate and what space could there be to provide bus bays and

driver facilities.

Criteria 3-5 and 3-6 (opportunity for business expansion: potential to have out of

hours services, and impact during construction) were measured through analysing

the surrounding land uses, existing bus routes and likely changes to bus routes for

each of the locations.

Several assumptions were made, underpinning the assessment of site options in

terms of bus operations around the town centre:

For this study’s analysis, it was assumed that the Guildford Gyratory

system would be improved, in accordance with Gyratory Scenario Two in

the Draft Guildford Town Centre and Hinterland Masterplan Report

(Allies & Morrison, October 2015). The main change affecting buses

would be Bridge Street being closed off to general traffic and catering only

to buses, pedestrians and cyclists. The removal of the gyratory would

have a significant impact on the surrounding traffic flows and would

endeavour to increase the safety and uptake of active transport options

such as walking and cycling.

The M&G Real Estate development would progress at The Friary with the

following changes to the local highway network:

- The closure of Commercial Road and Woodbridge Road;

- Pedestrian access to the new development would be from Onslow Street,

North Street and Leapale Road; and

- Leapale Road will become two-way in order to facilitate traffic movement

around the new development.






Page 13

2.2.4 Wider Strategic Objectives

Finally each option was appraised against the wider strategic objectives of

Guildford Borough Council and Surrey County Council to determine how well

they fulfil the political priorities.

The key measures that were used include: compatibility with plans for the

sustainable movement corridor (SMC); impact on the public realm; meeting local

planning policy priorities and the masterplan vision; impact on air quality;

indicative cost of facilities; and the impact on general traffic flow in and around

the town centre.

Several policy documents were reviewed and are documented in the Technical

Note on Existing Conditions (Arup, May 2016):

Guildford Borough Transport Strategy (GBC, 2016);

The Guildford Town and Approaches Movement Study (Arup, 2015);

Guildford Town Centre Masterplan Vision (Allies and Morrison, 2014);

The Guildford Borough Proposed Submission Local Plan: Strategy and Sites

(GBC, ongoing);

The Guildford Borough Infrastructure Baseline (GBC, 2013);

West Surrey Strategic Housing Market Assessment (GL Hearn, 2015); and

Planning applications for major developments in the town centre or on bus

routes to/from the town centre (i.e. Bedford Wharf and Civic Area 2nd Interim

Report for GBC, Revision 3 June 2016).

The options for relocated bus facilities were reviewed against the proposals and

priorities in these policy documents. Any new facilities would need to support the

growth of Guildford town centre and its surrounding communities. The criteria

that were measured against these documents were: Compatibility with plans for

SMC (4-1); Impact on Public Realm (4-2); Meeting local planning policy

priorities and masterplan vision (4-3); and Impact on General Traffic Flow in and

around town centre (4-6).

The Impact on air quality, criterion 4-4, appraised the route alignments resulting

from the potential new bus facility locations against their potential to worsen air

quality in already congested areas.

The Indicative cost of facilities (4-5) looks at the relative cost associated with each

of the alternatives based on the conceptual sketches of the most efficient layouts.

The elements that were taken into consideration include: the cost of the drivers’

and passengers’ facilities, the complexity of the physical layout, the potential

transport network improvements required to deliver the option (i.e. traffic signals,

highway network reconfiguration, supporting cycle and pedestrian infrastructures)

and other supporting infrastructure improvements (i.e. areas that are exposed to

flood risks).






Page 14

2.3 Incorporating Stakeholder Engagement

Stakeholder engagement undertaken in Stage One of this study identified the

needs and priorities of bus operators and other stakeholders. These were reported

in the Technical Needs Note (Arup, June 2016). Engagement with key

stakeholders enabled a better understanding of what factors must be prioritised in

any relocation of bus facilities in order to ensure that bus passengers and bus

services are positively impacted by any options for change.

The key stakeholders that were engaged included:

Current bus operators:

Stagecoach South;

Arriva;

Safeguard Coaches;

Carlone Limited;

Buses Excetera;

Compass Travel; and

Abellio Surrey.

Other stakeholders:

Surrey County Council (SCC);

Guildford Borough Council (GBC);

Network Rail;

Bus passengers;

The Friary / North Street developer; and

Wider interest groups such as Experience Guildford, the Guildford

Society, Guildford Vision and Guildford Bicycle Users Group.

The information provided by stakeholders facilitated the development of the

evaluation framework. These comments and how they correspond to the appraisal

criteria are summarised in Table 1.

Table 1 Stakeholder comments

ID Comments from Stakeholder Engagement Evaluation

Criteria ID

Current Bus Operations

SE 1-1 Students and concessions are very important to patronage

figures 1-2

SE 1-2 Bus to bus interchange in town centre is mainly for the

University and Hospital 1-3

SE 1-3 Driver changeover has to happen at the bus station as depot is

too remote, requiring longer layover period 3-2






Page 15


Criteria ID

Problems or Constraints with Current Facilities

SE 2-1

Congestion is a major concern, coming into/out of Guildford

during the AM and PM peak, school run c.15:00, and town

centre events (particularly market days)

4-4, 4-6

SE 2-2 Safety concerns with bus movements (bus v bus, bus v

pedestrian, bus v cyclist) 3-4

Bus Priority Measures

SE 3-1 Measures to reduce traffic congestion and improve bus journey

times are very important 3-1, 4-6

SE 3-2 An approach to improve service reliability and make buses more

attractive is vital to town centre accessibility 1-2, 1-7, 4-2

SE 3-3 Potential removal of the gyratory is supported as it would

improve traffic flows in one of the most congested areas 4-1, 4-3

Requirements for New Bus Facilities

SE 4-1 Layover is a key concern (number of bays and duration of

occupancy allowed in particular) 3-2

SE 4-2 Provision of drivers’ facilities close to bus layover facilities is vital 3-3

SE 4-3 Facilities need to be safe, secure and legible for passengers to

access and wait 1-7

SE 4-4

Development in the town centre must be approached

holistically; be an integral part of the economic growth.

Accessibility by bus and through-movement for pedestrians

across the town centre should be prioritised

1-3, 4-1, 4-2,

4-3, 2-4

SE 4-5

Congestion is still a key concern. If it takes too long to get

to/from the new bus facilities, reliability and passenger

satisfaction will be negatively affected

1-1, 1-2, 1-3,

1-4, 1-5, 1-6,

SE 4-6 Different routes have different requirements, therefore design

needs to be flexible to accommodate different needs 3-1, 3-5

SE 4-7

Drivers’ facilities need to be in close proximity to bus stands to

avoid the need for substantial changes to timetables to

accommodate driver breaks

3-2, 3-3

Views on Previous Studies and Locations

SE 5-1 There is no need for an integrated bus station per se, but new

facilities must not disbenefit passengers or bus operations

1-1 to 1-7,

3-1 to 3-6

SE 5-2

On-street facilities were not ruled out - but there needs to be

enough space for buses to layover and drivers’ facilities would

need to be in close proximity to the stands

3-2, 3-3

SE 5-3

The rail station and its connection with the town centre and bus

facilities is an important consideration, but it does not mean that

all bus facilities should be concentrated at the rail station – the

origin/destination of the majority of trips is the retail core

1-4






Page 16


Criteria ID

Other Stakeholders Priorities

SE 7-1

The new bus facilities should improve traffic flows as a whole

across the town centre (Bus Passenger, Experience Guildford,

Bike User Group)

4-6

SE 7-2 Routes should provide bus-to-bus interchange (Bus Passengers,

Guildford Transport Society Group) 1-3, 3-2

SE 7-3

Better facilities at the rail station for buses would promote bus-

to-rail interchange (Experience Guildford, Transport Group, Bike

User Group, Network Rail)

1-4

SE 7-4

More frequent bus services at park and ride facilities would

encourage the uptake of buses and reduce town centre

congestion (Guildford Transport Society, Bike User Group, SCC)

3-2

SE 7-5

The new bus facilities should align with the Sustainable

Movement Corridor idea and improve connectivity in Guildford

(Guildford Transport Group, Bike User Group, SCC, GBC)

4-1

SE 7-6

There needs to be a strong emphasis on improving the public

realm, improving access by sustainable means and encouraging

people to visit and stay longer (Experience Guildford, SCC, GBC)

2-1 to 2-4,

4-1 to 4-3

SE 7-7

Any proposed changes to the operation of the bus services and

supporting infrastructure need to contribute to the modal shift

to increase sustainable travel, improving air quality, health and

wellbeing (Bike User Group, GBC, SCC)

2-1, 2-4, 4-1,

4-2, 4-4

SE 7-8

The end solution must be consistent with existing and planned

projects. This includes the plans to remove the gyratory and

increase sustainable movement in Guildford (GBC).

4-1, 4-3

2.4 Appraisal Criteria

The assessment puts the performance of each option into three bands, colour

coded as Red, Amber and Green (RAG). These performance bands are calculated

for each individual metric and for the aggregated performance of the location

option. The full evaluation framework is summarised in Table 2.






Page 17

Table 2 Appraisal criteria

Broader

Evaluation

Criteria

ID Evaluation Criteria

RAG Scores

Red Amber Green

Bu

s P

ass

en

gers

1-1 Accessibility to Town Centre

retail core

More than 400m direct distance away from

town centre core (centre point taken on

North St and High St)

Between 200-400m direct distance away

from town centre core (centre point taken

on North St and High St)

Less than 200m direct distance away

from town centre core (centre point

taken on North St and High St)

1-2 Change in Overall Bus Journey

Times

More than 5 minutes of potential change in

overall bus journey times

Between 2 - 5 minutes of potential change

in overall bus journey times

Less than 2 minutes of potential

change in overall bus journey times

1-3 Ease of Bus-to-Bus

Interchange Most bus stops are dispersed Some bus stops are dispersed

All bus stops are consolidated in one

area

1-4 Ease of Bus-to-Rail

Interchange

Remote from Guildford Railway Station - the

direct distance between the new location

and railway station is greater than 400m

Short walk from Guildford Railway Station -

the direct distance between the new

location and railway station is between

200-400m

Adjacent to Guildford Railway Station

- the direct distance between the new

location and railway station is less

than 200m

1-5 Proximity to existing busiest

boarding points Remote from busiest boarding points Short walk from busiest boarding points Aligns with busiest boarding points

1-6 Proximity to existing busiest

alighting points Remote from busiest alighting points Short walk from busiest alighting points Aligns with busiest alighting points

1-7

Potential for facilities that are

safe, secure, and legible for

passengers to access and wait

Little potential - no space for high quality

passenger facilities

Some potential - limited space for secure,

legible and high quality facilities

High potential - off-street space for

consolidated, secure, legible and high

quality facilities

Imp

act

on

No

n-B

us

Use

rs 2-1 Interaction with Cycle

Infrastructure

Many potential conflicts with existing and

proposed cycle infrastructure

Some potential conflicts with existing and

proposed cycle infrastructure

No potential conflicts with existing

and proposed cycle infrastructure

2-2 Impacts on Taxi (stopping and

waiting)


proposed taxi waiting facilities


proposed taxi waiting facilities


and proposed taxi waiting facilities

2-3 Impact on Delivery and

Servicing Arrangements in

town centre


proposed retail / commercial on-street

delivery and servicing arrangements


proposed retail / commercial on-street

delivery and servicing arrangements


and proposed retail / commercial on-

street delivery and servicing

arrangements

2-4 Impact on Pedestrians

Significant impact to pedestrian routes and

would require significant intervention to

improve pedestrian amenity

Some impact on pedestrian routes and

would require localised intervention to

improve pedestrian amenity

No impact on existing or potential

pedestrian routes - no significant

interventions required






Page 18

Broader

Evaluation

Criteria


RAG Scores

Red Amber Green

Bu

s O

pera

tio

ns

3-1 Changes to Mileage and Run

Time

More than 5 minutes of potential change in

bus journey times overall

Between 2 - 5 minutes of potential change

in bus journey times overall

Less than 2 minutes of potential

change in bus journey times overall

3-2 Bus Capacity available for now

and future

Insufficient space available and requires

supplementary spaces elsewhere (less than

19 bus bays in one area)

Adequate space available to meet existing

bus demands (19 bus bays in one area)

Adequate space available to meet

existing and opportunity for future

expansion (more than 19 bus bays in

one area)

3-3 Access to driver facilities Poor potential to provide driver facilities

accessible for all drivers

Some potential to provide driver facilities

accessible for all drivers

Good potential to provide driver

facilities accessible for all drivers

3-4

Ease and safety of manoeuvres

accessing and egressing the

bays

Bus manoeuvring is extremely difficult and

unsafe (e.g. drive-in reverse-out system,

many potential conflicts between bus

movements, many potential conflicts

between bus and pedestrian / other

vehicular movements)

Bus manoeuvring is mostly reasonable but

with some constraints and safety issues

(e.g. 45 degree saw tooth, drive-in reverse-

out system, some potential conflicts

between bus movements, some potential

conflicts between bus and pedestrian /

other vehicular movements)

Bus manoeuvring is effective and safe

(e.g. Drive-in drive-out system,

shallow saw tooth layout and no

potential conflicts between bus

movements, no potential conflicts

between bus and pedestrian / other

vehicular movements)

3-5

Opportunity for Business

Expansion: Potential to have

out of hours services

Far from residential area but also far from

night time economy where demand for out

of hours services would arise from

Close to night time economy but also

within residential area so may face

opposition to out of hours services.

Far from residential area and close to

night time economy so would be

compatible with out of hours services

3-6 Impact during Construction Significant impact on current operations

during construction

Some impact on current operations during

construction

Impact on current operations during

construction is negligible

Wid

er

Str

ate

gic

Ob

jecti

ves 4-1

Compatibility with plans for

Sustainable Movement

Corridor (SMC)

Poor compatibility with SMC plans Reasonable compatibility with SMC plans Good opportunity to support and

strengthen SMC

4-2 Impact on the Public Realm Negative impact on the public realm e.g.

visual amenity No significant impact on the public realm

Improved visual amenity of the public

realm relative to existing site use and

facility

4-3

Meet local planning policy

priorities and Masterplan

vision

Little evidence of alignment with policies

and Masterplan vision

Some evidence of alignment with policies

and Masterplan vision

Closely aligns with policies and

Masterplan vision

4-4 Impact on air quality

Overall increase in bus mileage and negative

anticipated impact on air quality in already

congested area

No overall change in bus mileage and

negligible anticipated impact on air quality

in already congested area

Overall reduction in bus mileage and

positive anticipated impact on air

quality in congested area






Page 19

Broader

Evaluation

Criteria


RAG Scores

Red Amber Green

4-5 Indicative Cost of Facilities Relatively high overall cost of facilities Relatively medium overall cost of facilities Relatively low overall cost of facilities

4-6 Impact on General Traffic Flow

in and around town centre

Negative impact on already congested

highway networks

No significant impact on already

congested highway networks

Potentially improves the traffic

conditions on highway networks

OVERALL RATING

Lan

d

Ow

ners

hip

&

Avail

ab

ilit

y

5-1 Land Owned by Council No, the land is owned by others - Yes, the land is owned by Borough

Council

5-2 Land Available No, the land is not available - it has been

earmarked for other development -

Yes, the land is available for bus

facilities






Page 20

3 Identification of Options

A number of bus studies have been conducted previously in Guildford, resulting

in the identification of nine possible alternatives to the current bus station at The

Friary (see Technical Note on Existing Conditions, Arup, May 2016):

1. Combination of Bedford Road off-street facility plus on-street bays on

North Street and Leapale Road;

2. Bedford Road off-street facility alone;

3. Dolphin House off-street facility alone;

4. Guildford Railway station off-street facility plus Dolphin House off-

street facility;

5. Former Farnham Road bus station off-street facility plus on-street

bays;

6. On-street only at Leapale Road, North Street, High Street and Onslow

Street;

7. Bedford Road off-street facility plus on-street bays on High Street;

8. New off-street facility at The Friary as part of the new development;

and

9. On-street bays surrounding the new development at The Friary.

These alternatives are comprised of four main arrangements:

A single off-street site;

A combination of two off-street sites;

All on-street bus facilities; or

A combination of off- and on-street bus facilities.

This section of the report sets out the potential off-street and on-street locations

which could be used for bus facilities. 19 bus bays are required (including six

layover bays) to meet the existing AM peak hour demand. This number includes

park and ride services.

During operator interviews as part of Stage One, the suggestion came through

prominently that park and ride services are stand-alone and do not need to be

located close to other bus services or in a bus station. Therefore, by seeking to

provide 19 bays in any new facility (or facilities), this would make allowance for

either existing park and ride services, or expansion of other services if park and

ride stops were located elsewhere.

Due to physical constraints, 19 bays may be difficult to accommodate on one site

without compromising safety, performance and functioning of the town centre. In

the identification of options we highlight whether the on- or off-street solutions

may need to be combined in order to provide the requisite space for buses in a






Page 21

hybrid solution, but the potential of each individual option is set out first, in order

to clarify the process.

In addition to the previously proposed arrangements, we have undertaken a review

of all possible locations across the town centre and further options have been

explored which are set out in this report. During the comprehensive initial

screening of alternatives, there were several options that were excluded as it did

not meet the study’s goals and objectives. This included: moving the bus station to

the University.

Hence, in total, 10 options (or 15 locations) have been identified:

Option 1: Bedford Road Car Park;

Option 2: Dolphin House;

Option 3: Guildford Railway Station (with two options);

Option 4: Former Farnham Road bus station;

Option 5: Friary Interchange;

Option 6: On-street bus facilities (with three options);

Option 7: Debenhams site;

Option 8: Arriva depot;

Option 9: Car park sites (with three options); and

Option 10: Park and Ride sites.

Figure 7 illustrates the general location of these options. The following sections

describe each of the alternatives in detail, including the bus bay arrangements, the

capacity provided (for vehicles, passengers and supporting facilities) and the road

space required.

The identification of options does not consider land availability, so all potential

sites can be identified and assessed on their merits. Land availability is of course a

key factor and was a key determinant in whether the option was taken forward

from the long list.

The following section provides a brief description of each of the options. The

concept sketches showing potential layouts (as explained in Section 2.2.3) and

examples of how the site could work can be found in Appendix B.






Page 22

Fig

ure

7 L

oca

tio

n o

f p

ote

nti

al o

pti

on

s






Page 23

3.1 Option 1: Bedford Road Car Park

This option proposes a new purpose-built off-street bus station at the currently

underutilised Bedford Road surface car park. This site is bounded by Bedford

Road to the north, Onslow Street to the east, the Bridge Street Gyratory to the

south and River Wey Navigation to the west.

This site is approximately 180 metres (direct distance) away from the existing

Friary bus station and is well within walking distance to the town centre retail

core (less than 10 minutes’ walk). In addition, the Bedford Road car park is

conveniently adjacent to a pedestrian bridge that crosses over the River Wey

Navigation, providing access to Guildford rail station. This direct connection

between the bus station and rail station could potentially attract new and more

intermodal transport users. A new foot and cycle bridge over the River Wey at

Walnut Bridge has received Local Enterprise Partnership funding. This would

improve connections between the rail station to the town centre, and the Bedford

Road site would be the through-route between the two.

The Bedford Road Car Park site has been favoured by Guildford Borough Council

(GBC) as an opportunity area for major mixed-use development. In 2003, site

specific planning guidance for the Bedford Road area was approved by GBC.

This guidance does not make provision for a bus station at this site, but it does not

preclude it; emphasizing the importance of providing good connections between

rail, buses and the town centre.

Previous bus studies conducted on behalf of the Council selected Bedford Road

Car Park as their preferred design option. The previous studies include: Assisting

Decisions – Guildford Bus Station Study Issues and Options Report (MVA

Consultancy, 2011), Emerging Options and Refinements to Replacement Bus

Station Designs (MVA Consultancy, 2012), and Guildford Bus Station Issues

(Mott MacDonald, 2013). All the preferred options in the previous studies have a

similar bus facility design in which it is a combination of off-street bus facility for

buses to layover, paired with more on-street stops around the town centre.

During the consultation process undertaken in Stage One, all operators reported

that they would be favourable towards a new bus facility at Bedford Road,

provided that congestion in this area was alleviated and provided that town centre

development did not turn its back on the new bus station. Operators emphasized

the need to maintain through-movement for pedestrians across the town centre, in

order to achieve good connectivity, permeability and economic vibrancy (see

Technical Needs Note, Arup, May 2016).

3.2 Option 2: Dolphin House

Dolphin House is located at the northwest corner of North Street and the A320

Chertsey Street junction. The site is bounded by a private car park access to the

north, A320 Chertsey Street to the east, and North Street to the south. The land is

privately owned and there is one mixed use development on site.

Compared to the other alternatives, Dolphin House is the furthest east and is

approximately 350 metres (direct distance) away from the existing Friary bus






Page 24

station. The location of this proposed bus facility is within walking distance to the

town centre (less than 10 minutes’ walk) as it is situated along North Street,

however, it is perceived by stakeholders to be too far east of the focus of the town

centre, and does little to enhance connectivity to the rail station.

This option has been considered in Assisting Decisions – Guildford Bus Station

Study Issues and Options Report conducted by MVA Consultancy (2011). Based

on the assessment, Dolphin House was rated rather poorly and scored negatively

in terms of operational and economic impacts. This is primarily due to the

physical constraints of the site, including its level differences and small plot size.

3.3 Option 3: Guildford Railway Station

This site is approximately 310 metres (direct distance) away from the existing bus

station and is within walking distance of the town centre (less than 10 minutes’

walk), although the perceived distance is greater due to water and road barriers.

Similar to Alternative 1 (Bedford Road Car Park), more space for buses in this

location could potentially attract new bus users and encourage bus to rail

interchange, as opposed to car to rail interchange.

At present, there is only one bus stand at the entrance of Station View that is

served by routes 24 and 53, and rail replacement buses. The recent Solum

planning application has made provision for rail replacement buses to stand, but

not buses that are part of the regular network. This application was rejected in

June 2016 and may go to appeal and possibly a public inquiry.

Two options are put forward for this location. The first (‘do-minimum’ scenario)

assumes a very constrained footprint, without use of the land currently occupied

by the station car park. This option proposes on-street bus stands along the east

side of Station View, immediately adjacent to Guildford rail station. The proposed

location is bounded by the River Wey Navigation to the east, Farnham Road to the

south, and the railway line to the west. It would make use of the east side of

Station View, where there is currently space for approximately 12 taxi-only stands

and two short-term retail parallel parking spots.

This option has been considered in Assisting Decisions – Guildford Bus Station

Study Issues and Options Report conducted by MVA Consultancy (2011) as a

hybrid arrangement with Dolphin House (off-street facility). Based on the

assessment, this design option was given a moderate score and had issues in terms

of land ownership and economic impacts; namely the need to acquire Network

Rail land (the current car park) to develop a larger bus facility.

However, if the planning application for the Solum development could be

amended, more bus bays could be accommodated at this site. This would be

dependent on negotiations with the car park operator as the car park generates

significant revenue.

The second option (a ‘do-maximum’ scenario) assumes that as much land as

necessary is available for bus bays at Guildford rail station. Whilst this may not be

the case, it is worth exploring the footprint required to deliver a comprehensive

bus facility in this location given the current uncertainty over the development.






Page 25

3.4 Option 4: The Former Farnham Road Bus

Station

The Former Farnham Road Bus Station is located at the northeast corner of the

Park Street and High Street junction. This site is bounded by Onslow Street

(Bridge Street Gyratory) to the north, River Wey Navigation to the east, High

Street to the south and Park Street to the west. At present, the area is mainly

composed of the council owned car park and a small public house located closer

to the junction of Park Street and High Street. Guildford Borough Council

currently has plans to use this area as a riverside park and for flood alleviation.

The Former Farnham Road area is approximately 300 metres (direct distance)

away from the existing bus station. The location of this site is within walking

distance of the town centre (less than 10 minutes’ walk). The High Street extends

across the River Wey Navigation via the Guildford Town Bridge and provides

easy access for pedestrians to the town centre.

This option has been mentioned in previous reports as an interim replacement bus

facility when the Friary site is under construction. According to Assisting

Decisions – Guildford Bus Station Study Issues and Options report, this scheme

has already been approved as a temporary measure, but its flood risk was

highlighted. Based on the previous assessment, the Former Farnham Road Bus

Station was given the second highest overall rating, excelling at various

evaluation criteria such as accessibility to generators / attractors and minimal

disruption to existing bus routes, however, this was because it was part of a hybrid

solution with only buses to/from the west of the town centre using this facility.

If all bus routes were to use this facility as an alternative to The Friary, buses

coming from Farnham Road, Onslow Street and North Street would have to

access the site via the gyratory. Therefore if this site is progressed, it would be

preferable to propose a hybrid option, with buses north and east of the town centre

able to use alternative facilities and avoid using the gyratory.

3.5 Option 5: Friary Interchange

This option assumes that the proposed redevelopment of The Friary could

accommodate an off-street bus facility within the site boundary. The proposed site

is bounded by Leapale Road to the east, North Street on the south and

Woodbridge Road to the west.

This new location would be approximately 100 metres (direct distance) away from

the existing Friary Bus Station and is well within walking distance to the core of

the retail offer in the town centre (less than five minutes’ walk).

This option was first introduced in Emerging Options and Refinements to

Replacement Bus Station Designs report conducted by MVA Consultancy (2012).

In this report, two adaptations of this design option were discussed: (1) Off-street

bus facilities and (2) on-street bus facilities along Leapale Road.






Page 26

The planning application for The Friary shopping centre is currently under

development, however, the developer has stated that a bus facility on this site

would make development unviable.

3.6 Option 6: On-Street Bus Facilities

This option proposes solely on-street bus bays throughout the town centre. Three

sub-options have been developed under this type of bus facility design:

1. Bridge Street and Town Centre: bus bays would be located along several

major corridors including Bridge Street, Leapale Road, North Street, Ward

Street and High Street.

2. Onslow Street and North Street: bays would be on Onslow Street and

North Street, in a shallow saw-tooth arrangement; and

3. North Street only: all bus bays would be located along North Street.

On-street bus facilities enable good accessibility as all the proposed bus bays are

within easy reach of the town centre core retail area. This could potentially attract

more local residents to take public transport as an alternative to the car, as long as

congestion issues are addressed and the reliability of bus journey times are

improved. There is however a public realm and potentially an environmental

impact if large numbers of buses are stopping on street. Having an increase of

stops and up to 14 bus stands on-street would have a significant detrimental

impact on the streetscape, pedestrian amenity and shop frontages.

3.7 Option 7: Debenhams Site

This site is located close to the town centre retail core. It is bounded by Millbrook

to the north and east, and the River Wey to the west and south. The land is

currently occupied by Debenhams and Sports Direct. We have no indication that

this site could be made available but, as stated previously, it is important to

consider all potential sites in the town centre.

If the site could be redeveloped, a bus facility could be provided on the eastern

side of the site, with other uses on the western side (on the water) and above the

bus facility. A mixed use development of food and non-food retail as well as

office space would make best use of the plot and provide an attractive frontage

onto the water.

3.8 Option 8: Arriva Depot

The Arriva garage is located to the north west of the town centre, on the River

Wey. The site could be used for an alternative bus facility to The Friary if an

alternative site could be identified for Arriva’s use. The Council has advised that

the Stonebridge depot in Shalford or land at the Midleton industrial park could be

an alternative site for the Arriva garage to relocate to.

Given the prime waterfront location of this site, there could be an opportunity for

development above and around the bus facility, which could help to fund the

relocation.






Page 27

3.9 Option 9: Car Park Sites

There are a number of car park sites across Guildford town centre, as identified in

the Technical Note on Existing Conditions (Arup, May 2016).

We investigated the potential use of a number of these car park sites and have

progressed ideas for three: Millbrook, Mary Road and Bright Hill. Other car park

sites were considered but rejected on the basis of their difficult access

arrangements and level differences (Farnham Road and York Road), small

footprint (Leapale Road) or remoteness from the town centre (G-Live and

Guildford Park).

A relocation of bus facilities to one of these car parks could be achieved through

either:

Accepting an overall loss of car parking spaces; or

Relocating the Arriva garage to Shalford and using the Arriva depot site for

car parking facilities.

3.9.1 Millbrook Car Park

Millbrook car park is located approximately 750 metres (less than 10 minutes’

walk) from the existing bus station at The Friary. The site is bounded by the River

Wey to the north, west and south, and the A281 Millbrook to the east. It currently

provides 244 surface car parking spaces.

3.9.2 Mary Road Car Park

Mary Road car park is located close to the Arriva depot. The car park is bounded

by Mary Road to the east and north east, Bedford Road to the west and north west,

and Laundry Road to the south. It provides 107 surface car parking spaces.

3.9.3 Bright Hill Car Park

This site is located to the east of the town centre, close to the retail core, although

it is 650 metres (approximately 10 minutes’ walk) from the current bus station.

The car park site is bounded by Sydenham Road to the north and north west,

Bright Hill to the south, south west and south east, and Guildford Adult Learning

Centre to the east. The car park provides 121 surface car parking spaces.






Page 28

3.10 Option 10: Park and Ride Locations

There are four park and ride sites surrounding Guildford town centre: Spectrum

Leisure Centre, Merrow, Artington and Onslow. Figure 8 depicts these in relation

to the town centre.

Figure 8 Park and ride sites

The following analysis demonstrates which bus routes could terminate at which

park and ride sites in order to provide new passenger links. This is based on the

assumption that low frequency routes have longer layover periods and are

therefore more suitable for relocation to layover at out of town sites.

If an increase in patronage and passenger benefit (and therefore revenue) could be

demonstrated, then operators may be more amenable to considering such

proposals, despite the extra mileage and costs associated with these extensions.

Diagrams in Figure 9 demonstrate which routes could terminate at the park and

ride sites. The routes have been extended to provide origins with new destinations,

and vice versa. For instance, if route 91 was extended to Artington park and ride,

and KITE to Onslow park and ride, this would provide communities to the north

of Guildford town centre with new direct links to the south and to the west.

Currently the vast majority of routes into Guildford terminate at The Friary and

there are very few through-routes providing direct links to, from and across the

town centre.






Page 29

Figure 9 Potential routes to terminate at Park and Ride sites






Page 30

3.11 Summary of Options

The analysis undertaken in Stage One demonstrated that at least 19 bays are

required for an alternative bus facility in Guildford town centre with the

redevelopment of The Friary, along with supporting facilities. This would be a

‘like for like’ replacement and not make provision for future growth, such as

service frequency increases or route extensions to Guildford town centre.

Ten alternatives have been explored in this study, composed of a mixture of on-

and off-street options. Table 3 summarises the options discussed.

Table 3 Options and space provided

Option Bays Provided Minimum Additional

Bays Required

1: Bedford Road Car Park 14 0

2: Dolphin House 16 3

3A: Rail Station 9 10

3B: Rail Station 19 0

4: Farnham Road Bus Station 16 3

5: The Friary 17 2

6A: Bridge Street and Wider

Town Centre

19 0

6B: Onslow Street and North

Street

16 3

6C: North Street 19 0

7: Debenhams Site 15 4

8: Arriva Depot 11 8

9A: Millbrook 19 Some in town centre

9B: Mary Road 12 7

9C: Bright Hill 19 0

10: Park and Ride 13 bays for low frequency

terminating routes (4 required

in the peak of the peak)

15 required in the peak of

the peak for high

frequency terminating

routes and

boarding/alighting

This long list has been appraised according to the criteria set out in Section 2.






Page 31

4 Appraisal Results

4.1 Appraisal

Each alternative presents benefits and disbenefits to bus passengers, non-bus

users, bus operations, and the wider strategic objectives.

This appraisal presents a preliminary evaluation and provides an assessment of

how the options score against the appraisal criteria set out in Section 2. Table 4

summarises the results from the appraisal for all options.




\\GLOBAL.ARUP.COM\LONDON\PTG\ICL-JOBS\249000\24901200 GUILDFORD TOWN CENTRE BUS STUDY\4 INTERNAL PROJECT DATA\4-05 ARUP REPORTS\STAGE 2 OUTPUT 2\20161114 STAGE 2 OPTIONS APPRAISAL FINAL.DOCX

Page 32

Table 4 Guildford Bus Option Appraisals




\\GLOBAL.ARUP.COM\LONDON\PTG\ICL-JOBS\249000\24901200 GUILDFORD TOWN CENTRE BUS STUDY\4 INTERNAL PROJECT DATA\4-05 ARUP REPORTS\STAGE 2 OUTPUT 2\20161114 STAGE 2 OPTIONS APPRAISAL FINAL.DOCX

Page 33

LegendRed

Amber

Green






Page 34

4.2 Findings

4.2.1 Poor Performing Options

A preliminary screening of the options and review of the appraisal results (the

impact on bus passengers, non-bus users, bus operations, and wider strategic

objectives, as well as land ownership and availability) demonstrate that the

following poor performing options should not be progressed:

Option 2: Dolphin House;

Option 3A: Guildford Railway On-Street Bus Facilities;

Option 5: Friary Interchange;

Option 7: Debenhams Site;

Option 9A: Millbrook Car Park;

Option 9B: Mary Road Car Park; and

Option 9C: Bright Hill Car Park.

Whilst some of these options may have scored positively in certain categories,

overall they did not score well in terms of their impacts across all four categories.

In addition, a review of the land ownership and availability of the sites to be

developed into a bus facility has indicated their impracticality for being

shortlisted.

Although Option 2 (Dolphin House) is in close proximity to the retail core and

aligns with busiest alighting points in the town centre, its location does not allow

for easy bus movements into and out of the site and an increase in bus movements

in this area would potentially exacerbate the congestion already apparent along

North Street and Chertsey Street. Option 2 scored well in terms of bus passenger

impact but poorly with regard to its impact on non-bus users, bus operations, and

wider strategic objectives. In addition, the land is not owned by the Council and is

highly unlikely to be made available for development into a bus facility.

The appraisal of Option 3 (Guildford Railway On-Street Bus Facility) showed the

trade-offs to be impractical: in implementing a bus facility adjacent to the

Guildford rail station, there would be much improved bus to rail interchange, but

this is remote from the busiest boarding and alighting points in the town centre

and would compromise the taxi ranks adjacent to the railway station as well as

being unable to deliver efficient bus operations (with limited space for buses on-

street and potential conflict with the car movements to/from the Network Rail car

park). This option scored poorly in all categories of the main assessment and there

are additional land ownership issues which would have to be resolved with

Network Rail. It would require a considerable amount of negotiation between

multiple parties to work out a feasible solution, and given the poor scores across

categories, this would not be worthwhile.

Option 9A (Millbrook Car Park) scored positively in that it would have a minimal

impact on non-bus users (delivery and servicing vehicles, taxis, major pedestrian






Page 35

flows) and would meet operational requirements (with a large footprint and road

network capable of accommodating at least 19 bus bays). However, it scored

poorly in the other two categories of the main assessment: impact on bus

passengers and alignment with wider strategic objectives. Option 9A is relatively

far from the town centre and its location would require buses to be rerouted onto

Millbrook Road. This would ultimately exacerbate the traffic congestion in

already busy areas and result in routes from the south being cut back to terminate

at Millbrook. In addition, according to the GBC, Millbrook Car Park is well used

by local residents and the removal of 244 spaces would be problematic.

The main assessment identified Options 5 (Friary Interchange), 7 (Debenhams

Site), and 9C (Bright Hill Car Park) as higher-performing alternatives. However, a

review of the land availability and discussion with GBC shows that these

locations are not available to develop into off-street bus facilities.

Option 5 was predicated on the idea that a new bus facility could be developed

and integrated into the new Friary centre. Its location close to the retail core and

the continuity for passengers and bus operations afforded by a new facility on the

same site as the existing bus station would be advantageous, however, the

footprint required by a new bus facility would be detrimental to scheme viability

and therefore this option cannot be progressed.

Option 7 is unavailable for development as a bus facility and the land is not

owned by the Council. Land at the Mary Road car park (Option 9B) would be

available but this option did not score well compared with other sites due to the

capacity available and its location. Option 9C is located in a residential area and is

relatively remote from the retail core, therefore will not be progressed either.

All the on-street bus facilities (Options 6A, 6B, 6C) scored poorly in the main

assessment as a standalone arrangement for bus layover. A fully on-street option

would need to accommodate at least 19 bus bays. It would be difficult to

aggregate these stops onto one or two streets in the town centre without

compromising the general traffic. In addition, on-street facilities would have a

major impact on the town centre public realm, as some buses would lay over for

periods up to an hour, creating barriers to movement across the town centre for

pedestrians and negatively impacting the visual streetscape. Nevertheless, on-

street facilities in the town centre would deliver good accessibility for bus

passengers. Therefore a hybrid on- and off-street solution could be progressed to

capitalise on the benefits of on-street facilities whilst mitigating the potential dis-

benefits.

4.2.2 Higher Performing Options

The study identified the following as higher-performing options on the basis of

the main assessment (across the four categories of impact on bus passengers, non-

bus users, bus operations and wider strategic objectives), land ownership and

potential land availability:

Option 1: Bedford Road Car Park;

Option 3B: Guildford Railway Station Off-Street;






Page 36

Option 4: Former Farnham Road Bus Station;

Option 6: On-Street bus facilities (A, B, C);

Option 8: Land at the current Arriva depot; and

Option 10: Park & Ride Location.

These are considered further in the following chapter.






Page 37

5 Recommendation

The six shortlisted options were explored in further detail in order to reach a

workable solution. Following the full appraisal described in Section 4 and

discussion with GBC and SCC, it was apparent that no single option was suitable

for alternative bus facilities to The Friary for Guildford town centre.

For instance, the on-street options (options 6A, B and C) would provide

significant accessibility benefits for passengers, but the negative impact on visual

amenity, pedestrian permeability and public realm would be significant

considering the amount of space required on-street in Guildford town centre. This

would include up to 14 bus stands and additional bus stops which would

negatively impact on pedestrian amenity, shop frontages and the general

streetscape.

Conversely, the sites available for off-street facilities tend to be more remote from

the town centre retail core and therefore do not provide good bus passenger

accessibility. They do, however, provide other benefits such as the potential for

consolidated driver facilities, adequate space for safe bus manoeuvres, space for

long layover periods, and no conflict with delivery and servicing arrangements.

Therefore, in order to maximise benefits and mitigate against the disbenefits, a

hybrid on- and off-street solution is identified as the best way forward. This

would comprise an increase in on-street stops within the town centre retail core

area, to safeguard and improve bus passenger accessibility, and supporting off-

street facilities for layover and recovery time.

The actual location of the off-street facility is subject to further discussion

between Surrey County Council, Guildford Borough Council and bus operators.

However, the following sections describe two of the workable hybrid options

which could be taken forward, including the indicative bus stops and stands

arrangement, the indicative bus routings, and their associated benefits and

challenges.

5.1 On-Street Stops Plus Off-Street Layover at

Bedford Wharf

5.1.1 Overview and Operator Consultation

This option focuses on using on-street bus facilities to replace the existing Friary

bus station stops with a total of 11 bus stops (including three existing bus stops on

North Street which could cater for more services per hour). These bus stops would

be placed strategically throughout the wider town centre area in order to allow bus

passengers to continue to have good access to the retail core, without causing a

significant impact on delivery and servicing arrangements, pedestrian desire lines

and the urban realm. A Stage One Road Safety Audit (RSA) has enabled

refinement of the design.

In order to ensure that an increase in bus stops in the town centre is efficient and

safe, several supporting interventions would need to be in place, for instance






Page 38

enforcement of bus stop cages to ensure that they are not used by delivery and

servicing vehicles or blocked by parked cars; pedestrian crossings and footway

widening to ensure that footfall (including sufficient space for wheelchair users

and baby buggies) can be accommodated alongside passengers waiting for buses.

The supporting interventions required to facilitate an increase in stops are

described in more detail in the Delivery Plan.

The space provided by this hybrid solution is summarised in Table 5.

Table 5 Summary of bays provided

Bus Facility

Type

Location Quantity

Wider Area On-Street Bus Stops 11

North Street between Haydon Place and Chertsey Street (two on

each side of the road) 5*

Leapale Street between Leapale Lane and North Street (two on

each side of the road) 4

Bedford Road between the current Bedford Road Car Park and

Laundry Road 2

Layover Spaces 14

Bedford Road car park 14

Total Spaces 29

Note:

* Three out of the five on-street bus stops on North Street are existing bus stops

During consultation meetings for this study, operators were unanimous in

requesting that Bedford Wharf be considered because it is their preferred option if

The Friary bus station is not retained as a bus facility. As operator buy-in has been

emphasized by all as essential in order to reach a solution and unlock development

at The Friary, we recommend that the use of the Bedford Wharf area as a layover

facility is a potential option, together with the proposed increase in bus stops

throughout the town centre.

5.1.2 Benefits of Use of the Bedford Wharf Site for Layover

In the main assessment, the Bedford Road car park site scored the highest in the

majority of the categories due to its close proximity to the town centre and the

railway station, and its marginal change to mileage compared with the current bus

station.

It should be noted that the exact location of the layover facility is still to be

determined. However, since layover facilities requires less footprint than a bus

station, the rest of Bedford Road car park area could be used for mixed use

development (i.e. commercial or residential). In this way, the area could

incorporate a major mixed-use development (as shown in the Bedford Wharf and

Civic Area Masterplan) while simultaneously providing a solution acceptable to

bus operators.






Page 39

Based on the main appraisal results, the benefits of implementing this preferred

option are as follows:

Maintains good accessibility to the town centre and interchanges (bus to

rail, bus to bus). Having on-street bus facilities along North Street and

Leapale Road ensures that bus passengers still have good access to existing

retail and office areas. Additional bus stops along Bridge Street would also

provide bus passengers with good rail to bus interchange whilst remaining

within walkable distance to the town centre. However, these stops are

dependent on the gyratory removal scheme and have therefore not been

included in this assessment. With layover facilities at the Bedford Road car

park, stands could also be used as pick-up and drop-off points for passengers,

resulting in improved connectivity with rail services over the footbridge,

catering for demand at new development in the Bedford Wharf area, whilst

remaining within walking distance of the retail core. As the footbridge

crossing to Walnut Tree Close from the Bedford Road area is planned to be

improved, there is a good opportunity to improve connectivity between the rail

station and retail core. If buses were situated between the two, they could be

visible from both and provide a strong link through.

Aligns closely to existing busiest boarding and alighting points. A review

of the existing bus stop demand shows that bus stops in the current bus station

are by far the busiest. This is primarily due to the bus station’s proximity to

the retail core. The busiest alighting point outside the bus station is North

Street. This supports anecdotal evidence that passengers alight at the top of the

hill and walk down as they shop, before boarding in the bus station for their

return trip. The survey data supports this assumption as the number of

boarders outweighs the number of alighters per day. Therefore, including

additional stops on North Street and Leapale Road would meet existing and

future demand for passengers accessing the retail core.

Provides bus operators sufficient amount of layover space. Figure 10 shows that 14 bays could be provided comfortably on site at the Bedford Road

car park. This would be sufficient space to accommodate all terminating

routes and services with different layover requirements i.e. short periods for

driver changeover or long periods of layover where one driver stays with one

vehicle all day. It would represent a significant increase on the current six

dedicated layover bays at the Friary bus station, catering for future growth in

the bus network in Guildford. Increasing the number of through-routes is not

viable due to congestion issues in Guildford town centre which hamper

reliability. Therefore, growth in the town centre is likely to result in more

terminating routes rather than more cross-town routes.

Provides space for supporting facilities. There would also be adequate space

for driver facilities (i.e. toilets and a mess room). This layout works well in

several locations in the U.K. including Bath and Bristol (see Figure 11).

Reduces conflict with non-bus users. With a dedicated layover facility at

Bedford Road, conflict with town centre delivery and servicing arrangements

would be reduced, compared with a scenario where all layover would take

place on-street. In addition, by having a facility just west of the town centre,

where buses and drivers can wait during breaks, buses would have a lesser






Page 40

impact on the public realm of the town centre as they would not be standing

for extensive periods on-street.

Change in mileage is minimal. As noted, if the current bus station is no

longer available, operators would be willing to accept another solution as

close as possible to the current bus station, in order to limit the impact on

mileage and the commercial implications associated with extra mileage. The

indicative routings associated with a new facility at the Bedford Road car park

are shown in Figure 12 and Figure 13.

Figure 10 Conceptual sketch of bus layover facility at Bedford Road car park

Figure 11 Practical examples of saw-tooth and loop arrangement

Bath interchange layout (Source: WilkinsonEyre Architects)

This layout provides for clear separation of bus and pedestrian movement. Bath

interchange has adopted a one-way ‘loop’ arrangement, with layover spaces

located on the loop route and bus stops as a saw-tooth arrangement.






Page 41

Conversely, in order to maximise space for terminating routes, the central saw-

tooth bays can be used for layover, as per Cribbs Causeway in Bristol.

Cribbs Causeway, Bristol (Source: Google maps)






Page 42

Figure 12 Indicative routings at Bedford Road car park - inbound

Figure 13 Indicative routings at Bedford Road car park – outbound






Page 43

5.1.3 Challenges of Use of the Bedford Wharf Site for Layover

Some of the challenges associated with the preferred option include:

Additional junction and highway works are required. An increase in bus

stops on Leapale Road and North Street are predicated on the conversion to

two-way working following new development at The Friary. A design

showing the steps necessary to support stops at these locations and ensure

their safe functioning will be provided in the Delivery Plan. A four-arm

junction at Onslow Street/Woodbridge Road/York Road (as part of the

Bedford Wharf and Civic Area Masterplan) is also necessary to enable bus

movements to the Bedford Wharf site.

Potential impact to some non-bus users. Although an increase in bus stops

through the town centre is beneficial for bus passenger accessibility, there

could still be conflict with other traffic movement (including cyclists) and

pedestrian desire lines. Further examination in terms of road safety audits,

traffic flow impact, and swept path tracking analysis will be done for proposed

stop locations as part of the Delivery Plan and then for detailed design. Other

supporting interventions may be required to ensure the safety of new

proposals, for instance cycle lanes or footway widening. These will be

specified in the Delivery Plan.

Collaboration with bus operators and developers to ensure that

development is accessible and development opportunities are unlocked.

The use of the Bedford Road car park and move from the current Friary bus

station would require GBC and SCC to collaborate with bus operators and

private developers to ensure that any changes to the transport network (i.e.

highway works, cycle and pedestrian network changes) compliment use of this

site as a layover facility, support development at The Friary and protect and

promote the continued operation of the bus network in Guildford.

5.2 On-Street Stops Plus Off-Street Layover at

Arriva Depot

5.2.1 Overview

Land at the current Arriva garage near Mary Road could be considered for use as

a bus layover facility for all routes. This would also be in combination with an

increase in town centre bus stops to maintain passenger accessibility.

A concept exercise to determine how many bays could fit efficiently on site

showed that 11 bus bays could be accommodated (six of which are in a 45° saw-

tooth arrangement, drive-in reverse out system) with a single access point to the

site. The new purpose-built bus facility would also provide staff toilets and meal

relief facilities for the bus drivers. The high level concept is shown in Figure 14.






Page 44

Figure 14 Concept sketch of layover at the Arriva depot

Buses travelling to and from the layover facility at the Arriva depot would travel

via Mary Road and a new access road to a new four-arm signalised junction at

York Road/Onslow Street/Woodbridge Road roundabout, designed as part of the

GBC Bedford Wharf and Civic Area Masterplan. Details of the highway layout in

the Bedford Wharf and Civic Area is subject to change but the indicative layout

used for the purpose of this study was taken from the Bedford Wharf and Civic

Area 2nd Interim Report for GBC Revision 3 (Curious Worldwide Ltd., June

2016), as shown in Figure 15.






Page 45

Figure 15 Arriva depot and surrounding area

Figure 16 and Figure 17 show the indicative inbound and outbound bus routing

alignments. If buses could run in-service to the layover facility then an increase in

passenger demand could help offset the cost of extra mileage.






Page 46

Figure 16 Indicative routings for facility at the Arriva depot – inbound

Figure 17 Indicative routings for facility at the Arriva depot – outbound






Page 47

In order for the Arriva depot to be converted to a layover facility, an alternative

facility for the Arriva garage would need to be agreed; this is currently not

confirmed and is under discussion by GBC with Arriva.

This option was not favoured by operators due to the distance from the town

centre and additional mileage and operating cost.

5.2.2 Benefits

The potential benefits from use of the Arriva site as a layover facility are as

follows:

Beneficial impact on non-bus users. Similar to the Bedford Road car park

site, the Arriva depot would reduce potential conflict between buses and other

users, by reducing the amount of bus movements to be accommodated in the

town centre. This would bring particular benefits for delivery and servicing

arrangements and pedestrians in the town centre retail core.

Buses could run in-service to the layover facility via Mary Road, and

generate extra demand. With additional stops for buses to serve en route to

the layover facility, the network could support growth and new trips from the

Bedford Wharf and Civic Area. Additional bus stops on Bedford Road and

Mary Road (i.e. the new access road created to the junction with Woodbridge

Road/York Road/Onslow Street) would increase the connectivity between the

Bedford Wharf/Civic Area development and key destinations in Guildford (i.e.

High Street, University of Surrey, Royal Surrey County Hospital, Park & Ride

sites).

5.2.3 Challenges

Some of the challenges associated with this option are:

The additional mileage compared with the current bus station. Any

significant additional mileage and cost is not welcomed by bus operators.

Consultation feedback made it clear that they were unwilling to consider bus

facilities any further north than the Bedford Road car park site. This is both

due to the extra run time to reach the Arriva depot and a perception that it is

‘back of house’.

Additional junction and highway works are required. To facilitate bus

movements to and from the layover facility, several measures would need to

be in place, such as a four-arm signalised junction at Onslow Street/York

Road/Woodbridge Road. To support the increase in bus stops across the town

centre, two-way working of Leapale Road would also have to be

implemented.






Page 48

5.3 Other Potential Layover Options

5.3.1 Overview

The Bedford Road car park site scored best in the appraisal assessment outlined in

Section 4 and was favoured by operators. A bus facility at The Friary, at the

current Debenhams site, or at the current Bright Hill car park ranked next in the

assessment, but their availability was ruled out early in the study. The off-street

options which were ranked next in the assessment were the Arriva depot,

Guildford rail station, the former Farnham Road bus station and Park and Ride

sites. Therefore, the Arriva depot site would be the next potential alternative for

layover after the Bedford Road car park site, if its availability can be secured.

Availability of the Bedford Road car park site and Arriva depot are both still to be

determined by SCC and GBC.

The former Farnham Road bus station is a challenging site due to level differences

and potential works to remove the gyratory which would cause significant short

term disruption during construction. Therefore if the options at Bedford Road car

park or at the Arriva depot are not able to be progressed, the next best options to

investigate would be Guildford rail station and Park and Ride sites.

If these two options are considered as layover facilities only, as part of a hybrid

solution with more stops in the town centre, then the required footprint could be

much smaller than if a standalone bus station were required. These two

alternatives are considered briefly in the next sections.

5.3.2 Land at Guildford Railway Station

This layover facility option would be situated at Guildford rail station. Buses

would enter the layover facility via the gyratory and Walnut Tree Close. In terms

of indicative bus routing, this option would place slightly more stress on Bridge

Street (gyratory) and Onslow Street as buses approaching the town centre from

the north and east would have to use these roads in order to get to the layover

facility. Figure 18 and Figure 19 illustrate the indicative inbound and outbound

bus movements. Therefore, similar to the Farnham Road site, works to remove the

gyratory would have a significant short term impact on buses during construction

of the new highway layout.

Similar to the Bedford Road car park site, a layover facility requires less footprint

than a bus station so the rest of the area could be used for high-density, mixed use

development. This size of the bus facility would be dependent on negotiations

with the future developer, Network Rail and the rail operator.






Page 49

Figure 18 Indicative routings for Guildford rail station – inbound

Figure 19 Indicative routings for Guildford rail station – outbound






Page 50

5.3.3 Spectrum Park & Ride

Spectrum Park & Ride is located approximately 1.70 km northeast of Guildford

Town Centre on A25 Parkway. GBC owns the Spectrum Park & Ride site but

leases out the leisure centre to a leisure company. It is the closest park and ride

site to the current bus station.

Having the layover facility at Spectrum Park & Ride would be the most

appropriate for bus services that are low frequency and have long layover periods.

From stakeholder feedback, it was apparent that some services lay over for more

than 45 minutes in the current bus station. Terminating these services at the park

and ride sites would be a more efficient use of space in the town centre. However,

the commercial viability of such extensions would need to be explored with the

operators.

In addition, this option assumes that high frequency services would need to use

bays within the town centre for boarding, alighting and layover. However, given

that these routes are higher frequency, they would not remain for long periods on

the stands. Routes with only one journey per day are assumed not to need layover

space, and would instead return to the operator’s depot.

Stagecoach currently runs all park and ride services to and from Guildford town

centre. Any plans to extend non-park and ride services to the park and ride sites to

layover would need to be agreed with Stagecoach to afford drivers access to the

same facilities.

There are significant commercial sensitivities involved in this option for the

operators. The substantial additional mileage is unlikely to make this an

acceptable solution to operators and therefore it should only be explored as a last

resort.






Page 51

5.4 Summary

Following the full appraisal and discussion with GBC and SCC, it was apparent

that no single option was suitable for alternative bus facilities to The Friary for

Guildford town centre, due to limited availability and scale of sites.

Therefore, a hybrid option is recommended: a combination of an increase in on-

street stops in the town centre with a supporting layover facility off-street.

Combining these two elements ensures that passenger accessibility is maintained,

whilst allowing long layover periods and driver changeovers for bus operators.

Negotiations are ongoing between Surrey County Council, Guildford Borough

Council and the bus operators as to the availability of a suitable off-street layover

site. We have presented the benefits and disbenefits of using either the Bedford

Wharf site or the Arriva depot site for layover. Sites deserving further

consideration if necessary would be the rail station and Park and Ride sites.






Page 52

6 Conclusion

Several sites across Guildford town centre were identified for potential

alternative bus facilities to the current bus station at The Friary in order to

unlock a major retail development opportunity on this site.

Following an appraisal to determine the impact of each option on bus passengers,

non-bus users, bus operations and wider strategic objectives, as well as a

discussion with the client team about site availability and land ownership, it was

apparent that no single option scored well across all categories as well as being

available for development as a bus facility.

For instance, the on-street options (options 6A, B and C) would provide

significant accessibility benefits for passengers, but the negative impact on visual

amenity, pedestrian permeability and public realm would be significant

considering the amount of space required on-street.

Conversely, the sites available for off-street facilities tend to be more remote from

the town centre retail core and therefore do not provide good bus passenger

accessibility. They do, however, provide other benefits such as the potential for

consolidated driver facilities, adequate space for safe bus manoeuvres, space for

long layover periods, and no conflict with delivery and servicing arrangements.

The footprint required for a bus layover facility would be smaller than that

required for a bus station, and therefore could be incorporated into a mixed use

development.

Therefore, in order to maximise benefits and mitigate against the disbenefits, a

hybrid on- and off-street solution is identified as the best way forward.

This would comprise an increase in on-street stops in the core retail area, to

safeguard and improve bus passenger accessibility, with supporting off-street

facilities for layover and recovery time.

In the main assessment, the Bedford Wharf site scored the highest in the

majority of the categories due to its close proximity to the town centre and the

railway station, and its marginal change to mileage compared with the current bus

station. However, the land is prioritised for other development by GBC so it may

not be available for development as a bus layover facility.

Negotiations are ongoing as to the availability of other potential off-street sites

such as the Arriva depot site.

Several supporting interventions will need to be in place for any of the above

solutions to be acceptable and possible to implement. These will be set out in a

Delivery Plan following this report.

Appendix A

Survey Results

Guildford Town Centre Bus Study

Bus Boarding and Alighting Surveys

5 August 2016

2

• The Guildford Town Centre Bus Study has been commissioned by Surrey County

Council and Guildford Borough Council.

• The study’s purpose is to determine bus operator and bus passenger requirements in

order to successfully identify appropriate bus stop and stand arrangements in the

town centre.

• This is necessary to support the proposed redevelopment of The Friary / North

Street and wider town centre regeneration.

• Numbers of passengers boarding and alighting at stops across Guildford town

centre (including the bus station) were required to inform the selection of

appropriate sites for relocated facilities.

Background

Background

3

• After a competitive tendering process, Tracsis Traffic

Data Ltd were appointed to undertake surveys on 12

July 2016 and 14 July 2016.

• Surveyors manually counted the number of

passengers boarding and alighting at each stop from

0700-1900.

• There were no unusual circumstances recorded on

the day (e.g. road traffic accidents) and surveys were

undertaken before the school holidays, therefore

results are regarded as representative of a ‘typical’

weekday.

• 24 stops were surveyed in the bus station (including

the alighting point) and 15 stops in the wider town

centre.

Process

Process

4

Boarding and Alighting – Bus Station

Bus Station

55%

A

45%

5

Boarding and Alighting –Friary Bus Station

By Bus Route Number

Bus Route Description

200 Artington Park & Ride - Guildford

KITE Aldershot – Guildford

4 Guildford – Park Barn – Royal Surrey Hospital –

Guildford

5 Guildford – Royal Surrey Hospital – Park Barn –

Guildford

26 Guildford – Stoughton – Hospital – University –

Guildford

36 Manor Park – University – Guildford – Burpham –

Merrow – Guildford

37 Guildford – Merrow – Burpham – Guildford – University

– Manor Park

27 Guildford – University – Hospital – Stoughton –

Guildford

53 Guildford – Cranleigh – Ewhurst

400 Onslow Park & Ride – Guildford

100 Spectrum Leisure Centre – Guildford

3 Guildford – Bellfields


300 Guildford – Merrow Park & Ride

63 Guildford – Cranleigh – Horsham

34 Guildford – Woking – Camberley

71 Guildford – Godalming – Haslmere

65 Guildford – Farnham – Alton

70 Guildford – Godalming – Haslemere – Midhurst

32 Guildford – Dorking – Strood Green – Redhill


17 Guildford – Fairlands Circular

28 Guildford – Fairlands – Pirbright – Brookwood –

Knaphill – Woking

18 Guildford – Onslow Village – Guildford

42 Ewhurst – Cranleigh – Godalming – Guildford

479 Guildford - Little Bookham - Leatherhead - Epsom

24 Guildford - Cranleigh


46 Farnham - Godalming - Guildford

515 Guildford - Cobham - Esher - Kingston upon Thames

134 Guildford - Woking - Camberley

25 Guildford - Merrow - Cranleigh

135 Camberley - Woking - Guildford

462 Guildford - Ripley - Woking


17a Guildford - Fairlands Circular

23 Guildford - Merrow

126 Guildford - Stoughton - Hospital - University - Guildford

520 Aldershot - Ash - Flexford - Guildford/Woking

478 Guildford - Effingham - Leatherhead

523 Guildford - Godalming - Busbridge - Godalming -

Guildford

63X Guildford - Cranleigh - Horsham

8 Guildford - The Mount - Guildford

6

Boarding and Alighting –Friary Bus Station

By Bus Route Number

Park & Ride Bus

Routes

21%

Local Bus Routes

79%

No of Passengers Alighting

Park & Ride Bus

Routes

22%

Local Bus Routes

78%

No of Passengers Boarding

7

• 4321 passengers alighting and 5193 passengers boarding across the day - more than all other surveyed bus

stops in wider town centre combined (this is 930 boarding and 1698 alighting).

• There are more boarding passengers than alighting. Many passengers choose to alight at North Street near the

Library (927) instead of the bus station.

• For the bus station as a whole, the peak alighting time is 1000, with 622 passengers alighting.

• For the bus station as a whole, the peak boarding time is 1600, with 747 passengers boarding.

• Park & Ride bus routes passengers make up approximately 20% of all boarding and alighting at the bus station

• Popular bus routes (highest number of passengers boarding and alighting) include:

1. Bus Route 200, Artington Park & Ride – Guildford (839 passengers)

2. Bus Route KITE, Aldershot – Guildford (750 passengers)

3. Bus Route 5, Guildford – Royal Surrey Hospital – Park Barn – Guildford (729 passengers)

4. Bus Route 4, Guildford – Royal Surrey Hospital – Park Barn - Guildford (706 passengers)

5. Bus Route 26, Guildford – Stoughton – Hospital – University - Guildford (608 passengers)

Bus Station Profile

Bus Station

8

• Most buses use the alighting stop for

setting down across the day (1671

passengers). However, stands 21 and 22

are also well used (117 and 593

passengers alighting respectively).

• Alighting is heavily weighted in the

morning at the alighting point and at stand

21, whereas the profile is more varied at

stand 22. Data shows that many buses use

stand 22 that are not scheduled to do so.

This could be due to a lack of space

elsewhere or the ease of manoeuvring into

and out of this space.

Bus Station Alighting

Bus Station

Alighting Point

Stand 21

Stand 22

9

Bus Station Alighting, Bus Routes

Alighting Point

10


Stand 21

11


Stand 22

12

• Boarding is evenly spread across stops with the exception

of stops 4, 15, 16 and 20 which has lower passenger

demand.

• According to the surveys, several stops accommodate

more than 300 boarding passengers per day: Stop 1 (427

boarders), Stop 6 (364 boarders), Stop 7 (343 boarders),

Stop 8 (325 boarders), Stop 10 (342 boarders), Stop 11

(361 boarders), Stop 12 (390 boarders), Stop 14 (369

boarders).

• Most stops show the highest boarding in the PM peak

hour (between 1600-1700). However, some stops have a

different peak hour as the bus routes cater towards the

university demographics (i.e. peak hour at 1400). This

can be seen in bus routes 27, 36, 37 which goes to

northwest Guildford (e.g. University of Surrey).

Bus Station Boarding

Bus Station

Stop 1 (for 200

park and ride)

Stop 10 (for 27, 36, 37)

13

Bus Station Boarding, Bus Routes

Stop 1 (for 200 park and ride)

14

Bus Station Boarding, Bus Routes

Stop 10 (for 27, 36, 37)

15

Boarding and Alighting – Wider Town Centre

Wider Town Centre

16


By Bus Route Number


300 Guildford – Merrow Park & Ride

100 Spectrum Leisure Centre – Guildford

3 Guildford – Bellfields

200 Artington Park & Ride - Guildford

36 Manor Park – University – Guildford – Burpham –

Merrow – Guildford

37 Guildford – Merrow – Burpham – Guildford – University

– Manor Park

53 Guildford – Cranleigh – Ewhurst

26 Guildford – Stoughton – Hospital – University –

Guildford


4 Guildford – Park Barn – Royal Surrey Hospital –

Guildford

5 Guildford – Royal Surrey Hospital – Park Barn –

Guildford

63 Guildford – Cranleigh – Horsham


479 Guildford - Little Bookham - Leatherhead - Epsom


27 Guildford – University – Hospital – Stoughton –

Guildford

32 Guildford – Dorking – Strood Green – Redhill

KITE Aldershot – Guildford

400 Onslow Park & Ride – Guildford

515 Guildford - Cobham - Esher - Kingston upon Thames

24 Guildford - Cranleigh

71 Guildford – Godalming – Haslmere

17a Guildford - Fairlands Circular

134 Guildford - Woking - Camberley

478 Guildford - Effingham - Leatherhead

63X Guildford - Cranleigh - Horsham

72 Guildford - Godalming - Aaron's Hill




17 Guildford – Fairlands Circular

25 Guildford - Merrow - Cranleigh

46 Farnham - Godalming - Guildford


18 Guildford – Onslow Village – Guildford

42 Ewhurst – Cranleigh – Godalming – Guildford

523 Guildford - Godalming - Busbridge - Godalming -

Guildford

135 Camberley - Woking - Guildford


520 Aldershot - Ash - Flexford - Guildford/Woking

PT School Routes

17


By Bus Route Number

Park & Ride

Bus Routes

29%

Local Bus

Routes

71%

No of Passenger Alighting

Park & Ride Bus

Routes

35%

Local Bus Routes

65%

No of Passenger Boarding

18

• Alighting is higher over a period of 3 hours from 0800 to 1100, with a slight peak at 0800 of 276 passengers. It is

then consistent across the day.

• Boarding is spread evenly through the day, with a slight peak across the town centre at 1700 of 135 passengers.

• This indicates different trip purposes of bus passengers –

1. Journeys to/from work;

2. For shopping; and

3. Combination of both (trip chaining).

• Park & Ride bus routes passengers make up 27% of all boarding and alighting in wider town centre

• Popular bus routes (highest number of passengers boarding and alighting) include:

1. Bus Route 37, Guildford – Merrow – Burpham – Guildford – University – Manor Park (295 passengers)

2. Bus Route 300, Guildford – Merrow Park & Ride (277 passengers)

3. Bus Route 5, Guildford – Royal Surrey Hospital – Park Barn - Guildford (267 passengers)

4. Bus Route 36, Manor Park – University – Guildford – Burpham – Merrow – Guildford (216 passengers)

5. Bus Route 200, Artington Park & Ride – Guildford (203 passengers)

Wider Town Centre Profile

Wider Town Centre

19

• The busiest alighting point (927 passengers) is North Street westbound, as passengers alight before reaching

the bus station. This is heavily weighted in the morning from 0800-1100.

• Approximately 40% (366) of the passengers alighting from this stop are from Park & Ride sites. This indicates

the trip purpose of bus passenger alighting at this stop are journey to work or shopping trips.

Wider Town Centre Alighting

Wider Town Centre

North Street w/b

20

Wider Town Centre Alighting – North Street Westbound Stop

Wider Town Centre

21

• The next busiest alighting point is Guildford Park Road southbound (254 passengers) which has consistent but

low levels of alighting across the day.

Wider Town Centre Alighting

Wider Town Centre

Guildford Park Road s/b

22

Wider Town Centre Alighting – Guildford Park Road Southbound Stop

Wider Town Centre

23

• The busiest boarding point (417 passengers) is Guildford Park Road northbound. This is weighted to the

morning peak, with the highest figures between 0700 and 0900.

• A review of the bus routes at this boarding point suggest that passengers are heading to either University of

Surrey or Royal Surrey Hospital in the morning peak period.

Wider Town Centre Boarding

Wider Town Centre

Guildford Park Road n/b

24

Wider Town Centre Boarding – Guildford Park Road Northbound Stop

Wider Town Centre

25

• The next busiest boarding point is North Street eastbound (West of Ward Road) with 172 passengers. Boarding

is slightly higher in the evening peak at 1700.

• A review of the passenger demand and bus routes at this boarding point suggest that majority of the trips are

journey from work

Wider Town Centre Boarding

Wider Town Centre

North Street e/b

26

Wider Town Centre Boarding – North Street Eastbound Stop

Wider Town Centre

27

• There are more people boarding and alighting at The Friary bus station than at the wider town centre bus stops combined.

But, broken down by stop, the busiest boarding stops are stop 1 in the bus station (427 passengers) and Guildford Park Road

northbound (417 passengers). The busiest alighting stops are the unnumbered alighting stop in The Friary bus station (1671

passengers) and North Street westbound (927 passengers).

• Peak boarding and alighting times vary by bus stop location and by route serving the stop. Although there is a general trend

for the alighting peak to occur in the AM and boarding peak to occur in the PM, as you would expect with a town centre

attracting trips, there are notable exceptions:

- Guildford Park Road n/b has peak boarding in the AM. This could be due to passengers arriving at the rail station

travelling to the hospital or university by bus, or due to demand from local residents to the hospital or university.

- Stand 22 in the bus station has its alighting peak in the PM which is probably due to ease of use by bus drivers.

• The busiest bus routes are at the Friary Bus Station and they are:

- Bus Routes 200 (to/from Artington Park & Ride);

- KITE (to/from Aldershot);

- 5 and 4 (to/from Royal Surrey Hospital / Park Barn); and

- 26 (to/from Stoughton, Royal Surrey Hospital, University of Surrey).

Summary

Summary

Appendix B

Conceptual Sketches






Page B1

B1 Dolphin House – Concept Sketch and

Example

The proposed arrangement for Dolphin House would be 45° saw-tooth bus bays

with a drive-in, reverse out (DIRO) system. This is akin to arrangements at

Leicester Haymarket bus station, which opened in May 2016, or Chorley

Interchange in Lancashire, which opened in 2004.

Example: Leicester Haymarket Bus Station (Source: Joe Stott, ahr-global.com)






Page B2

Example: Chorley Interchange (Source: Google earth)






Page B3

B2 Guildford Rail Station - Concept Sketches

and Example

The first (‘do-minimum’ scenario) assumes a very constrained footprint, without

use of the land currently occupied by the station car park. This option proposes

on-street bus stands along the east side of Station View, immediately adjacent to

Guildford rail station.

On-street option

If the maximum amount of space were available at Guildford rail station, a

shallow saw-tooth arrangement with drive in, drive out bays could be employed to

provide 19 bays. The advantages of the drive in, drive out system is that the

potential for bus on bus accidents is reduced compared with a drive in, reverse out

arrangement. Paradise Street at Liverpool One uses an arrangement of this type.






Page B4

Off-street ‘do maximum’

Example: Liverpool One Bus Station (Source: Craig Magee Photography)






Page B5

B3 Former Farnham Road Bus Station –

Concept Sketches and Example

The proposed arrangement for the Former Farnham Road Bus Station site is a 45°

saw-tooth bus facility with a drive-in, reverse out (DIRO) system. Unlike Dolphin

House, buses would have to access and egress the site from the same point and so

an internal loop would need to be provided. This is similar to the recent Stoke on

Trent bus station.

Example: Stoke on Trent bus station (Source: virtualplanit.wordpress.com)






Page B6

B4 New Facility at the Current Location –

Concept Sketch

This option assumes that the proposed redevelopment of The Friary could

accommodate an off-street bus facility within the site boundary. The proposed

arrangement for a new Friary Interchange could be a 45° saw-tooth bus facility

with a drive-in, reverse out (DIRO) system.






Page B7

B5 On-Street Stops and Stands – Concept

Sketches

B5.1 On-Street Bays Bridge Street/Town Centre

In this option, bus bays would be located along several major corridors including:

Bridge Street, Leapale Road, North Street, Ward Street and High Street.






Page B8

B5.2 On-Street Bays Onslow Street

On-street Bus Facilities, Onslow Street Corridor (Guildford Society Transport Group,

Maurice Barham, 13 June 2016)

On-street Bus Facilities, Onslow Street & North Street Corridor (Guildford Society

Transport Group, Maurice Barham, 13 June 2016)






Page B9

B5.3 On-Street Bays North Street Only

This option is predicated on a number of assumptions:

North Street would remain open to two-way traffic;

The market could be relocated;

Existing on-street car parking could be removed;

Delivery and servicing vehicles could use alternative routes; and

Footway widths are sufficient for passenger waiting facilities to be

accommodated as well as pedestrian movements.






Page B10

B6 Debenhams Site – Concept Sketch

15 bays could be accommodated in a 45° saw-tooth arrangement with a drive-in,

reverse out (DIRO) system, similar to Dolphin House.






Page B11

B7 Car Park Sites – Concept Sketches and

Examples

B7.1 Millbrook Car Park

19 bays could be provided in a 45° saw-tooth arrangement, which would make

efficient use of the space and access off Millbrook, as in potential design options

at Dolphin House, the new Friary Interchange and Debenhams site. This would

enable a mixed use development on site, in addition to the bus facility.






Page B12

B7.2 Mary Road Car Park

12 bays could be accommodated through use of a 45° saw-tooth arrangement in a

central island. This would allow good passenger waiting facilities to be

consolidated in the central island, but would require passengers to cross the

vehicular routes to access the waiting area. Island passenger waiting facilities are

common in London bus stations (such as Walthamstow and Stratford Regional),

although not with saw-tooth arrangements. However, a working example can be

seen in Madrid at the Principe Pio bus station.

Example: Madrid Principe Pio Bus Station (Sources: callisonrtkl.com and 20minutos.es)






Page B13

B7.3 Bright Hill Car Park

19 bays could comfortably be accommodated on the site in a 45° saw-tooth

arrangement on the outer edges of the loop for a drive-in reverse-out system,

together with a central island for additional bays. It can be seen in practice in

Glasgow’s Buchanan Bus Station.

Example: Glasgow Buchanan Bus Station (Source: nordenergi.org)

Documents

Guildford Town Centre Bus Study...Guildford Town Centre Bus Study Stage Two Report: Options Appraisal 249012-00/JK Final | 14 November 2016 This report takes into account the particular