SWR to withdraw public access to Guildford Station Footbridge

[BenS123]

Guildford station footbridge

www.southwesternrailway.com

South Western Railway is going to withdraw access to the footbridge for pedestrians from the 4th December to the 1st March, with the aim of collecting data so that Network Rail can apply to permanently withdraw public access next year.

• Pedestrian access to Guildford station footbridge will be temporarily withdrawn due to abuse towards station staff, fare evasion and ticketless travel
• Access will be withdrawn on a trial basis from Monday 4 December to Friday 1 March and those without a rail ticket will need to use the alternative route across Farnham Road bridge
• South Western Railway and Network Rail will collect data from the trial before applying to permanently withdraw bridge passes in 2024
• Over just 25 days in November 2022, almost 2,000 bridge passes were used by fare evaders to access platforms, board trains and travel without a ticket

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Not surprised really. It's very easy to get onto the platforms (and up to the ungated Guildford New Line or North Downs Line stations - of which trains to the former almost never have any checks) by simply saying you're crossing the bridge.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Is this a public right of way? if so, how are they able to withdraw it? If not, why is it even an option?

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Is this a public right of way? if so, how are they able to withdraw it? If not, why is it even an option?

It is through private property, for which there is an implied permission - this being that anyone (unless this permission is withdrawn for whatever reason) can enter, but on the owner's terms, and those terms are possession of a valid ticket.

 

[Haywain]

Is this a public right of way? if so, how are they able to withdraw it?

I guess it could explain why they have to "apply" to withdraw bridge passes. However, public rights of way get closed/withdrawn regularly. It's no guarantee of access for evermore, even if it should be.

 

[simonw]

Is this a public right of way? if so, how are they able to withdraw it? If not, why is it even an option?

The article states

The requirement to allow pedestrians to walk through the station and over the bridge was introduced following a planning agreement between the British Railways Board and Guildford Borough Council in 1988


I assume SWR believe that agreement can be terminated

 

[tspaul26]

Is this a public right of way? if so, how are they able to withdraw it? If not, why is it even an option?

It’s not a public right of way, but it is a binding covenant which is legally enforceable against the landowner for the timebeing.

It is through private property, for which there is an implied permission - this being that anyone (unless this permission is withdrawn for whatever reason) can enter, but on the owner's terms, and those terms are possession of a valid ticket.

This is not correct. There are express rights, not merely implied rights.

I guess it could explain why they have to "apply" to withdraw bridge passes. However, public rights of way get closed/withdrawn regularly. It's no guarantee of access for evermore, even if it should be.

It’s not a public right of way. The ‘application’ would be to the Lands Tribunal under section 84 of the Law of Property Act 1925 to modify or discharge the covenant.

The article states

The requirement to allow pedestrians to walk through the station and over the bridge was introduced following a planning agreement between the British Railways Board and Guildford Borough Council in 1988


I assume SWR believe that agreement can be terminated

It is an agreement pursuant to section 52 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1971.

This can be modified or discharged by:

1. Agreement between the parties i.e. with the local authority’s consent. Possibly the intended outcome of the trial.
2. Application to the Lands Tribunal. If the local authority is opposed.
3. Legislation (unlikely in this particular case).

 

[Highview]

Unfortunately the fare evaders will just push through the barriers instead, the staff do their best but I've witnessed the abuse they get at Woking, for example. How the staff cope with this on a daily basis I don't know, I would never be able to.

 

[Fazaar1889]

I assume SWR believe that agreement can be terminated

I thought Network Rail managed the station? Although tbf, I'm not actually sure why... It's not a massively major station.

 

[Train Maniac]

From an outsiders point of view, it doesnt look like that much of a diversion via Farnham Rd. Surprised it hasnt been done before this

 

[Revilo]

It’s not a public right of way, but it is a binding covenant which is legally enforceable against the landowner for the timebeing.

This is not correct. There are express rights, not merely implied rights.

It’s not a public right of way. The ‘application’ would be to the Lands Tribunal under section 84 of the Law of Property Act 1925 to modify or discharge the covenant.

It is an agreement pursuant to section 52 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1971.

This can be modified or discharged by:

1. Agreement between the parties i.e. with the local authority’s consent. Possibly the intended outcome of the trial.
2. Application to the Lands Tribunal. If the local authority is opposed.
3. Legislation (unlikely in this particular case).

Re 1., if the Local Authority refuses permission to vary the obligation, they could also appeal to a planning inspector (formally the Secretary of State).

 

[Baxenden Bank]

South Western Railway and Network Rail will collect data from the trial before applying to permanently withdraw bridge passes in 2024

What data are they expecting to collect?

Our survey said: In January and February 2024 no people used the footbridge, therefore it is not necessary?

 

[jayah]

What data are they expecting to collect?

Our survey said: In January and February 2024 no people used the footbridge, therefore it is not necessary?

Sounds like presenting a 'fait accompli' as well as collective punishment. If 2,000 fare evaders used it in 25 days, there are probably 10,000-20,000 genuine pedestrians in the same time. It is not suggested the latter have caused the problems.

Exactly the same anti-social fare evaders, who it is also reported threaten to stab staff, will still get on the DOO train at the ungated station up the road and will still arrive at the staffed ticket barriers at 9pm on a Saturday night, giving it large and expecting free travel from the safety of a mob.

SWR, Surrey Police, BT Police and the confetti of 'partner agencies' need to get their act together and deal the problem by enforcement. Closing a pedestrian walking route isn't a solution to any of those problems.

 

[Bald Rick]

Although tbf, I'm not actually sure why... It's not a massively major station.

NR took it on as it made the development project easier, and couldnt be troubled by change of franchisee.

 

[Fazaar1889]

NR took it on as it made the development project easier, and couldnt be troubled by change of franchisee.

Ah makes sense. Thanks

 

[DelW]

From an outsiders point of view, it doesnt look like that much of a diversion via Farnham Rd. Surprised it hasnt been done before this

If you're coming from the direction of the cathedral and university, and heading towards the entertainment area around the Odeon, it's a rather shorter route to use the station footbridge, cross over Walnut Tree Close, and then use the footbridge over the river.

It's also a much pleasanter walk. The pavements on Farnham Road bridge and Bridge Street are narrow and often congested, and the virtually permanent traffic queues belch exhaust smoke at you. Crossing over Walnut Tree Close at the one-way system is hazardous too, there is a pelican crossing nearer to the station but it's slow to respond and adds a bit more distance.

 

[Towers]

It is through private property, for which there is an implied permission - this being that anyone (unless this permission is withdrawn for whatever reason) can enter, but on the owner's terms, and those terms are possession of a valid ticket.

Surely not, everyone entering needs a valid ticket? Or are you including Bridge Passes?

It’s an interesting one; what happens if a pedestrian arrives at the gatelines without a bridge pass and demands access, are they legally entitled to pass through anyway?

 

[Recessio]

From an outsiders point of view, it doesnt look like that much of a diversion via Farnham Rd. Surprised it hasnt been done before this

It's already pretty crowded there though. However I imagine not that many people actually used the footbridge pass to cross the footbridge, given that there is the road nearby, so maybe it won't lead to much of an increase in foot traffic. Wouldn't surprise me if nearly everyone getting a footbridge pass was actually just a fare dodger!

What really needs sorting is the junction and crossings to the south of the carpark/main entrance on the east side of the tracks, it's absolutely lethal trying to not get hit by a car/drivers having to dodge a stream of uni students! If they expect everyone to use Farnham Road then something surely needs to be done to the crossings...

 

[Sultan]

As there is already a subway at the station which serves all platforms, could Network Rail just remove access to the platforms via the footbridge entirely, leaving it as just a way to get from Guildford Park Road to Station Approach (by building a short extension)?

 

[lxfe_mxtterz]

As there is already a subway at the station which serves all platforms, could Network Rail just remove access to the platforms via the footbridge entirely, leaving it as just a way to get from Guildford Park Road to Station Approach (by building a short extension)?

The Guildford traincrew depot is accessed via the bridge so that would make it a bit of a trek to get to and from the platforms.

 

[Bill Badger]

The issue I would be most concerned about is that if this become permanent it opens the potential to closing the access from Guildford Park Road even to ticket holders.

It would be a significant inconvenience for anyone going to catch a train from Guildford Park Road if they had to trapse all the way along Farnham Road and access the front of the station.

But if the access remains open to ticket holders, it will need to be staffed, so there is no cost saving, and the abuse from the mindless minority who have no intention of paying won't cease.

 

[Towers]

As there is already a subway at the station which serves all platforms, could Network Rail just remove access to the platforms via the footbridge entirely, leaving it as just a way to get from Guildford Park Road to Station Approach (by building a short extension)?

The Guildford traincrew depot is accessed via the bridge so that would make it a bit of a trek to get to and from the platforms.

I would have thought it might be possible to divert one of the Platform 1 or 2 staircases to lead out of the station via a new exit into the car park area, and then retain all other platform access staircases with locked doors for crew use. That would retain simple access for staff, maintain the public right of way and allow a reasonably easy transit from the bridge exit, along the station frontage and to the entrance.

It’s worth pointing out that SWR are happy to operate Basingstoke in this way, whereby outside of the peaks anyone arriving on the car park side of the station has to transit via a cramped staircase and subway to the other side of the station, so the there is a precedent for similar arrangements.

 

[DelW]

As there is already a subway at the station which serves all platforms, could Network Rail just remove access to the platforms via the footbridge entirely, leaving it as just a way to get from Guildford Park Road to Station Approach (by building a short extension)?

For passengers connecting between New Line trains in platform 1 and all other routes, the subway is a much longer and more convoluted walk than the footbridge, which has a direct staircase to/from p1.

There would also be capacity issues at busy times - the subway currently only takes about half the pedestrian flow but can still get very crowded.

 

[inais20]

I’m not familiar with Guildford but is the footbridge wide enough that a fence down the middle, separating the paid/not paid traffic (like at Kensington Olympia) could be used?

 

[lxfe_mxtterz]

I’m not familiar with Guildford but is the footbridge wide enough that a fence down the middle, separating the paid/not paid traffic (like at Kensington Olympia) could be used?

Not really... there are already painted lines down the middle (with arrow stickers) to directionally separate the flow of traffic, but as mentioned by @DelW it does get very busy and these lines often end up being ignored. A physical fence would just make it even more crowded.

 

[swt_passenger]

I’m not familiar with Guildford but is the footbridge wide enough that a fence down the middle, separating the paid/not paid traffic (like at Kensington Olympia) could be used?

The BBC website news article has a decent photo if you scroll down a bit:

Guildford station pedestrian bridge access withdrawn due to fare dodging

The bridge at Guildford station is regularly used by fare evaders, with some becoming abusive.

www.bbc.co.uk

It’s a fairly ordinary size, I expect they would need the full width just for rail passengers at peak times.

 

[Bald Rick]

But if the access remains open to ticket holders, it will need to be staffed,

It wouldnt need to be staffed, lots of examples elsewhere where secondary exits are gated and controlled remotely.

 

[infobleep]

Not surprised really. It's very easy to get onto the platforms (and up to the ungated Guildford New Line or North Downs Line stations - of which trains to the former almost never have any checks) by simply saying you're crossing the bridge.

It is easy to get onto the ungated Guildford New Line at London Road (Guildford). As for the North Downs Line, Shalford, although that is further out in the borough.

 

[SWT_USER]

Did a similar thing happen at one of the EMR stations (Derby or Sheffield?) A few years ago? IIRC the TOC backed down in the end.

I can't see much incentive for the local authority to approve the permanent closure. Presumably SWR are free to put additional RPI's at the bottom of the steps on the platform if they feel that strongly about it.

 

[infobleep]

From an outsiders point of view, it doesnt look like that much of a diversion via Farnham Rd. Surprised it hasnt been done before this

I mentioned this to my mum, who is in her 80s and she said Farnham Road Bridge isn't nice or as safe. She doesn't enoy that route.