At least it doesn't look like they're repeating past mistakes and adding a subway, the ones around the rest of the town centre are pretty naff.
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
SWR to withdraw public access to Guildford Station Footbridge
- Thread starter BenS123
- Start date
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Meerkat said:
"They should have put a new non-rail passenger bridge in the redevelopment spec.........................the businesses in the development would welcome through foot traffic."
I seem to recall that the original planning docs referred to an expanded retail offer in the re-modelled station. I wonder what will happen now with the reduced foot traffic?
And on the subject of subways, that from the bottom of the High Street to the now defunct Debenhams was filled in and closed. The replacement light-controlled pedestrian crossing improved the traffic flow no end. Not.
"They should have put a new non-rail passenger bridge in the redevelopment spec.........................the businesses in the development would welcome through foot traffic."
I seem to recall that the original planning docs referred to an expanded retail offer in the re-modelled station. I wonder what will happen now with the reduced foot traffic?
And on the subject of subways, that from the bottom of the High Street to the now defunct Debenhams was filled in and closed. The replacement light-controlled pedestrian crossing improved the traffic flow no end. Not.
Heaven forfend that motorists are slightly inconvenienced by creating a safer, more pleasant and more accessible environment for people who are walking
duffield
Established Member
Nottingham has certainly become a bit more pleasant for pedestrians since the subways (under Maid Marian way, and near the Royal Centre, for example) were filled in.
Or even, with the upcoming acceptance of Contactless Payment Cards at Guildford, a method of allowing customers to touch in and out for zero fare, like at Southwark LUL station.
Fazaar1889
Member
They removed the one at the bottom of the high street thankfully. A subway within the station is fine but externally? Absolutely not.
ong
Piror to Monday, the barriers at the front entrance of the station were open late at night. This is Monday to Saturday. It's different on Sundays.
There were people around but barriers were open. I've not been to the front of the station late at night thid week so I can't say what they are doing now.
But if both sides are unmanned, what is stopping people walking across the footbridge? In fact someone might go across either unaware or out of habbit forgetting the changes. Not to mention boarding trains.
Of course they should have CCTV so if the person gets to the other side and it is manned, they just need to hold the person to one side whilst they review the CCTV to ensure they did in fact cross by mistake. I don't know how long that would take.
It was closed as it kept flooding when flooding occurred and it damaged Debenhams lower ground floor.
Debenham's no longer exists but even if they could reopen it, would there be funding?
Not sure why that would stop them adding a bridge right over the top
Not sure how as the Debs entrance from the subway had a massive metal door, like some kind of bunker!
Maybe coincidental - a flood that flooded the subway just went in the ground level of Debs and down.
The crossing is much much better. Don’t reckon it makes much difference to the traffic, just a minor delay before catching the car in front up again at the next jam.
Fazaar1889
Member
Ah I meant the development is limited to the station building. If they had extended the redevelopment site to over the platforms and the back entrance, then they would be able to add a platform
I noticed on Wednesday that the poster saying the footbridge was closed did not have a map of the diversion. It's the same poster as used in the past when staff have been on strike.
I wonder if different teams deal with those posters compared to the trail footbridge closed posters.
Given footbridge closed posters exist, with a map, perhaos they could share the map with whoever makes the other strike posters.
After all the station was open, just only via the front.
This morning I was travelling to Woking. There are only two ticket machines at the back and one was out of service, so a queue had formed.
There were two people manning the barrier but neither of them were obviously trained to sell tickets.
In the past you'd just ask to go across the footbridge so you could use many of the other ticket machines available at the front but now to do that you'd need to walk around the road, which obviously is much longer.
Before this footbridge change, there was almost only ever one person at the barrier. I don't know if the barriers are now manned by two peiole for as long as someone is there or whether there is just one person some of the time.
I saw people asking to go across the footbridge and being told no. I am certain that late at night it is not manned.
With regards to buying tickets, I appreciate one can buy tickets online but having to select journeys is slower and annoying. As I had the SWR app I thought I'd try that but I couldn't remember my password. I also had my glasses in my bag.
At which point I decided to just wait. I am aware there is a work around on the Southern branded Web site that avoids the need to select times so I should make an effort to learn that.
I wonder if different teams deal with those posters compared to the trail footbridge closed posters.
Given footbridge closed posters exist, with a map, perhaos they could share the map with whoever makes the other strike posters.
After all the station was open, just only via the front.
This morning I was travelling to Woking. There are only two ticket machines at the back and one was out of service, so a queue had formed.
There were two people manning the barrier but neither of them were obviously trained to sell tickets.
In the past you'd just ask to go across the footbridge so you could use many of the other ticket machines available at the front but now to do that you'd need to walk around the road, which obviously is much longer.
Before this footbridge change, there was almost only ever one person at the barrier. I don't know if the barriers are now manned by two peiole for as long as someone is there or whether there is just one person some of the time.
I saw people asking to go across the footbridge and being told no. I am certain that late at night it is not manned.
With regards to buying tickets, I appreciate one can buy tickets online but having to select journeys is slower and annoying. As I had the SWR app I thought I'd try that but I couldn't remember my password. I also had my glasses in my bag.
At which point I decided to just wait. I am aware there is a work around on the Southern branded Web site that avoids the need to select times so I should make an effort to learn that.
Last edited:
@ 7pm-ish Friday evening, I am buying a ticket at machine at Guildford Park Rd entrance, man approaches barrier, words to the effect of 'I am just walking across' - staff member opens barrier. man walks through.
I think the staff member was almost certainly agency - blue high-viz, probably just wanted to avoid argument/aggression.
Of course when I returned a few hours later, all the barriers are open, anyone could walk from one side of the station to the other.
I think the staff member was almost certainly agency - blue high-viz, probably just wanted to avoid argument/aggression.
Of course when I returned a few hours later, all the barriers are open, anyone could walk from one side of the station to the other.
At least they aren't closing the barriers after 10 pm at night or all day on Sundays as they did in the naughties. I can't remember which year but it was done for operational reasons, so they said at the time.
They obviously changed their operational working so it could remain open thanks to operational reasons.
I'm still puzzled by this. If people behaving badly is so much of a problem, and BTP have too much else to do, why don't caring SWT hire licenced private security to protect their staff and, for that matter, travellers? We've all seen how two or three large gentleman at the door of pubs and clubs have a calming effect. Of course that would cost a few bob as would putting teams of revenue protection people onto trains. But wouldn't the security deal with the anti-social behaviour and the revenue protection deal with the fare evasion? Or would SWT rather sit back and clutch their pearls while the poor benighted pedestrians from Onslow Village trudge around the station and down the Farnham Road? I take it that Guildford Borough Council entered into the agreement with Network Rail's predecessor because it was to the benefit of Guildford residents. So why should SWT and NR not stick to it and deal with the problems as I've outlined?
SWR, of course. I still think in terms of slam door trains and mini bars of Coal Tar soap in the toilets.
If you do walk across please don't abuse anyone. SWR will have the roads closed down too.
Coal tar soap. Now that takes me back.... to looking at old guide books, as I'm not old enough to have seen such things in person.
I'm sure almost everyone's bored to tears with this but real enthusiasts might want to have a look at this from December 2018 so only five years ago:
It's 100 pages long so Boxing Day afternoon might be a good bet. But there are a couple of interesting things. Tha author seems convinced the bridge is a public right of way and suggests that a solution to crowding and revenue protection problems would be to build a new, wider bridge with passengers divided from pedestrians.
I think I read that somewhere on here
It's 100 pages long so Boxing Day afternoon might be a good bet. But there are a couple of interesting things. Tha author seems convinced the bridge is a public right of way and suggests that a solution to crowding and revenue protection problems would be to build a new, wider bridge with passengers divided from pedestrians.
I think I read that somewhere on here
I raised this with Surrey County Council Highways department, a number of years ago and it is not a public right of way.
I've since learnt it is covered under a section agreement. I forget which number but it is mentioned earlier in this thread.
The other day I was travelling through on Sunday and the back entrance was manned after 6 pm. That use to not be the case prior to this change.
It definitely isn't manned after 10 pm though and it is possible to walk across. When I tried this I did have a valid ticket on me. I wasn't going to try it without.
Still the same sign up at Guildford with the same dates. Though it's now moved past the gate line to the bottom of the footbridge stairs near platform 1... So it can only be read if you are already inside the station with a ticket, which isn't much good for anyone wondering why they can't buy a bridge pass!
Interesting question as to whether that meets legal requirements for consultation....
A pretty Aframe sign doesn't meet them wherever it's placed it would require official notices to be posted similar to a planning notice, that is all that is required.
The trial closure of the bridge comes to an end today so tomorrow we can use it again. It'll be interesting to see whether SWR have taken that on board and briefed their people (whether SWR or agency) on the gateline.
I really do object to this closure. The S106 agreement was put in place for the benefit of people going to and fro between the town and the Onslow village direction. I'm not convinced that things are anywhere near as bad as SWR suggest and think they are over-egging the pudding with their stuff about aggressive anti-social behaviour and megabucks fare evasion.
We can all see what will happen now. SWR will report everything was sweetness and light over the trial period with everyone too busy writing sonnets and giving way to one another to behave badly.
I really do object to this closure. The S106 agreement was put in place for the benefit of people going to and fro between the town and the Onslow village direction. I'm not convinced that things are anywhere near as bad as SWR suggest and think they are over-egging the pudding with their stuff about aggressive anti-social behaviour and megabucks fare evasion.
We can all see what will happen now. SWR will report everything was sweetness and light over the trial period with everyone too busy writing sonnets and giving way to one another to behave badly.
SouthernOne
Member
- Joined
- 6 Apr 2018
- Messages
- 33
The bridge at Guildford station was open to bridge passers today
Surreyman said: "Disagree, I live very close to the back entrance, I think this should be permanent, I have seen plenty of evidence of fare dodging and anti social behaviour in the last few years."
I'm sure he's right but people dodge fares and behave badly up and down the land, unfortunately. This is from the Guardian the other day:
www.theguardian.com
That's why we have police and security and so on. If SWR spent some of the money they claim has gone in fare evasion on tough, revenue protection people maybe that would help. If we all take the SWR route and close down where there are problems, we'll end up staying in bed and pulling the duvet over our heads.
Either way it'll be interesting to see what happens next.
I'm sure he's right but people dodge fares and behave badly up and down the land, unfortunately. This is from the Guardian the other day:
They bite, they hit, they spit: patients assault staff at Nottingham hospital
Queen’s Medical Centre had 1,800 incidents of aggression, violence and harassment in 2022-23
That's why we have police and security and so on. If SWR spent some of the money they claim has gone in fare evasion on tough, revenue protection people maybe that would help. If we all take the SWR route and close down where there are problems, we'll end up staying in bed and pulling the duvet over our heads.
Either way it'll be interesting to see what happens next.
Even during the trail the gates were not manned after 10 pm.
As a regular user of the bridge, I completely agree.
Fazaar1889
Member
If they want to make this permanent, either a separate footbridge should be constructed or the council should rework the pavement down Guildford Park Road/Farnham Road Bridge and around the corner of the Gyratory, it simply isn't suitable for large masses or those with accessibility needs. I've seen plenty of people slip down that steep pavement on the Gyratory corner. Imo, a dream solution would be a wholly accessible and separate footbridge just alongside the current footbridge, but I know that's not possible given the financial situation recently.
I doubt they'll go to the expense/effort of building a bridge when Guildford station is on the (admittedly long-term) radar for a complete rebuild anyway. Unfortuntately, the road improvements are down to Surrey Council, not Network Rail. Though I do wonder two things: 1) if NR closes the bridge, will it inspire/force Surrey CC to do something about the pavements situation? Or 2) will Surrey CC block NR closing the bridge, unless NR either build a new bridge or contribute to pavement+road improvements?