Guildford Station

[Tirov]

Netword Rail want to rebuild Guildford Station!

http://www.guildfordforward.com/

The local worthies are up in arms over the size of the development. I can't blame them!

There is also the issue of the Farnham Road Bridge which is in a poor state! Watch out for 'trouble at Mill'!

The Guildford Master Plan has yet to be agreed yet Solum are moving on in complete disregard to the Towns traffic problems.

 

[HarleyDavidson]

And even more stupidly, GBC want to block access to the station from the gyratory and force everyone who wants to go to/from the station down Bridge St, along Woodbridge Road onto what was the old A3 at Ladymead, then back along Woodbridge Meadows to the station.

I can't use any of the words that I & most people think of the idea as I'd get banned. :roll:

 

[455driver]

I can't use any of the words that I & most people think of the idea as I'd get banned. :roll:

Oh please do, you would be doing us all a favour!

 

[HarleyDavidson]

That's charming that is.

 

[455driver]

That's charming that is.

Oh come on, you cant offer a gift horse like that and not expect me to accept it!

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Wasn't Guildford completely rebuilt only about 20 years ago?

 

[tsr]

Solum Regeneration (or whoever it actually is) always seem to like to design (and, occasionally, actually build) "pretty" facades with out much concern for the railway behind them. The Redhill scheme still hasn't got off the ground at all, with everybody having waited for about 18 months for any significant news whatsoever (including local councillors) and now they're out of sync with all the other town centre works; rumour has it that a start date will be mooted "soon". There's much disappointment as apparently they'll now have to build over the Princess Way car park without offering a new one, and the whole thing is basically a very small ticket office with a massive block of flats and a wedge of Waitrose in the corner. The Epsom scheme is all very well and good but effectively it's just a Tesco, Costa and big block of flats plonked over the entrance to the existing station, still with a significant number of vagaries unimproved within the station itself, including a subway which floods, bizarre lift access from the platforms, and staff and toilet facilities which don't appear to have been overhauled for a number of decades.

If this is the level of competence shown then I should think the core of Guildford's operational station will remain very much the same for at least the medium term, unless there are major planning details showing otherwise, and you'll probably be waiting some time for the entrance and flats to be built/rebuilt anyway. The last update on the main Solum site about the Guildford works dates from late 2014. I don't deny that Guildford already needs a significant overhaul, but I'm not holding out much hope that this will do everything that's needed, including simple things like (again) staff accommodation on the platforms, properly-insulated waiting rooms, signal visibility in selected places (Platform 2, I'm looking at you) and control of the public right of way. Everything else is just jam on top really. As for the traffic and highways issues, though I do visit Guildford fairly regularly (for work and leisure), I exclusively visit by rail, so I'm not really an expert on that bit.

 

[The Ham]

And even more stupidly, GBC want to block access to the station from the gyratory and force everyone who wants to go to/from the station down Bridge St, along Woodbridge Road onto what was the old A3 at Ladymead, then back along Woodbridge Meadows to the station.

I can't use any of the words that I & most people think of the idea as I'd get banned. :roll:

That will just mean that more people would use the other side of the station for drop off and puck up's.

If I understand correctly the development of the station land is then supposed to create revenue to provide funding for station improvements. As such I wouldn't expect much to happen until the station land development has been fully built out and mostly occupied.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

The Epsom scheme is all very well and good but effectively it's just a Tesco, Costa and big block of flats plonked over the entrance to the existing station, still with a significant number of vagaries unimproved within the station itself, including a subway which floods, bizarre lift access from the platforms, and staff and toilet facilities which don't appear to have been overhauled for a number of decades.

The subway doesn't flood as such; the problem is that part of the roof over the foot of the stairs to the platform 1 / 2 island leaks - ironically this roof over the stairs was renewed as part of the redevelopment!

As to the toilets, they were fully refurbished only about 2 or 3 years before the redevelopment, so not more than 10 years ago, but it was done on the cheap with low grade materials like the unfortunately fairly common contiboard type panels. The issue is compounded by a generally less than ideal usage profile, including one character ( who I understand has at least been subsequently caught ) who would consistently deliberately poo in the urinals...

You are right that the platforms themselves were not touched, but at least the lifts - previously goods lifts only - were replaced with passenger lifts; the slightly unusual routing at platform level is not an issue except when it rains and I can't really see any other way they could have done it without spending so many millions. I do agree the lifts need a canopy extension to keep the platform level walk to them under cover!

The canopy itself was re-glazed I think about 15 years ago.

Incidentally one historic but little known feature of Epsom is that the final two canopy supports at the country end of platform 4 still show shrapnel damage from World War 2.

 

[Surreyman]

The main issues that are upsetting locals are, in no particular order: -

1. The look and height of the flats/Apartments that will be built on the town side of the station, making the area look very urban 'changing the character of the town' is the phrase used.
2. The number of extra residents will cause an inevitable increase to road traffic in an area that frequently 'gridlocks' - I don't just mean the immediate central 'gyratory system but the whole of Guildford centre.
3. Linked to 2 above, No additional railway crossing for either road traffic (Farnham Rd), or pedestrian traffic - a separate pedestrian bridge not linked to the Station was part of the original proposals but was dropped.
Currently pedestrians can use a 'Bridge Pass' to use the railway over-bridge, or just walk across when exits are not manned, very easy to travel ticketless!

There are other proposals around, i.e closing Bridge St to road vehicles and making the Friary bridge 2 way.

Other than a new larger ticket hall there are no real improvements to the actual operating rail side.

 

[HarleyDavidson]

The bridge pass system is seriously flawed and it allows a large amount of fraudulent travel.

The bridge is also responsible for a significant amount of anti-social behaviour,ranging from drunkenness & drug taking to just plain very rowdy behaviour.

The bridge passes should be made a payable thing.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

It should be a wider segregated bridge so that those passing through don't have any means of accessing the platforms at all.

 

[Deepgreen]

The subway doesn't flood as such; the problem is that part of the roof over the foot of the stairs to the platform 1 / 2 island leaks - ironically this roof over the stairs was renewed as part of the redevelopment!

As to the toilets, they were fully refurbished only about 2 or 3 years before the redevelopment, so not more than 10 years ago, but it was done on the cheap with low grade materials like the unfortunately fairly common contiboard type panels. The issue is compounded by a generally less than ideal usage profile, including one character ( who I understand has at least been subsequently caught ) who would consistently deliberately poo in the urinals...

You are right that the platforms themselves were not touched, but at least the lifts - previously goods lifts only - were replaced with passenger lifts; the slightly unusual routing at platform level is not an issue except when it rains and I can't really see any other way they could have done it without spending so many millions. I do agree the lifts need a canopy extension to keep the platform level walk to them under cover!

The canopy itself was re-glazed I think about 15 years ago.

Incidentally one historic but little known feature of Epsom is that the final two canopy supports at the country end of platform 4 still show shrapnel damage from World War 2.

I lived in Epsom until about four years ago. The Solum project was dire - the subway ceiling leaks in multiple places, and there is a series of yellow warning 'A' boards permanently dotted around to warn of the wet floor. Mineral build-up on the floor has started at these drip spots, which could have been so easily prevented by the simple use of drip trays fixed to the ceiling and draining correctly. The number of ticket gates is inadequate (especially as at least one is often broken), and the subway fills with people trying to exit every time a peak time train arrives. Of course, with a packed subway, the yellow 'safety' boards become almost invisible and get knocked/tripped over. The exterior still hasn't been properly finished after all these years! The badly-cracked walls of the staircases to the platforms were simply painted over rather than being repaired and re-surfaced/tiled. A shabby and cheap-looking job.

Ironically, I now use Redhill, and dread the Solum work there. It would be nice to think that the work could be co-ordinated with the mythical platform 0 works there, but what are the chances?

 

[Surreyman]

Going just slightly off topic, London Road Station(Guildford) has a 3/6 car stop sign on the down platform, yet SWT don't have/operate any 3 or 6 car trains?
(well ok they might one day operate a single 455 coupled to a 456).
450s & 444s operate through (but do not stop).
159s are never seen in Guildford but even if on diversion they wouldn't stop at London Road.
Is this a mistake or is there a reason for this?

 

[Kite159]

Going just slightly off topic, London Road Station(Guildford) has a 3/6 car stop sign on the down platform, yet SWT don't have/operate any 3 or 6 car trains?
(well ok they might one day operate a single 455 coupled to a 456).
450s & 444s operate through (but do not stop).
159s are never seen in Guildford but even if on diversion they wouldn't stop at London Road.
Is this a mistake or is there a reason for this?

Could be for Southern if they ever send down 377/3s (assuming they are cleared)?

As for SWT 6 car workings, there is some on Sundays (Hampton Court services)

 

[455driver]

Could be for Southern if they ever send down 377/3s (assuming they are cleared)?

As for SWT 6 car workings, there is some on Sundays (Hampton Court services)

Is the right answer, Southern operate/operated a couple of services in the morning and evening peaks, some were 455s and some were 377s.

 

[HarleyDavidson]

There have been numerous visits by 158/159's to Guildford in the past year or so.

We do occasionally operate 6 car formations but not very often.

 

[Deepgreen]

There have been numerous visits by 158/159's to Guildford in the past year or so.

We do occasionally operate 6 car formations but not very often.

But no 158/159s to London Road, presumably.

 

[HarleyDavidson]

Not as far as I am aware. Officially or unofficially.

 

[The Ham]

The main issues that are upsetting locals are, in no particular order: -

1. The look and height of the flats/Apartments that will be built on the town side of the station, making the area look very urban 'changing the character of the town' is the phrase used.

Do they walk around the rest of that area with their eyes closed, as there are several high buildings in the vicinity? Probably the best example of which are the flats over the Bedford Road car park, maybe they would like the station to be in keeping with that?

2. The number of extra residents will cause an inevitable increase to road traffic in an area that frequently 'gridlocks' - I don't just mean the immediate central 'gyratory system but the whole of Guildford centre.

It depends, most people who will be attracted to owning a flat there would likely be working in Guildford close to the Station or would be wanting to use the station. As such there is a of chance that traffic is unlikely to increase as much as people fear. There could even be some who current drive from elsewhere who move to those flats and so reduce traffic movements, which then offsets some of the extra traffic generated.

You would have to be very unaware of traffic in Guildford to move there thinking that driving in the rush hour would be a good plan. Even a visit off peak would show a lot of traffic.

3. Linked to 2 above, No additional railway crossing for either road traffic (Farnham Rd), or pedestrian traffic - a separate pedestrian bridge not linked to the Station was part of the original proposals but was dropped.
Currently pedestrians can use a 'Bridge Pass' to use the railway over-bridge, or just walk across when exits are not manned, very easy to travel ticketless!

There are other proposals around, i.e closing Bridge St to road vehicles and making the Friary bridge 2 way.

Other than a new larger ticket hall there are no real improvements to the actual operating rail side.

Station improvements are due once a plan for what is needed (I.e. extra platforms) has been decided upon.

Given the barriers have smart ticket readers it could be arranged that users have to touch in/out with a bridge pass that gives users 15 minutes to cross (I.e. long enough that there should be no problem for any one to do so but short enough that there would be no way that people could get a free ride anywhere). If people used them to get a free ride one way (I.e. to get into a train at the station but would need a ticket to get off again) it's unlikely to be worth it for most people.

If there was a loophole, the TOC would know when the most tickets were picked up and not used to exit and so could put in place resources to counteract this.

When gates are unmanned, regardless of the station, ticketless travel is a potential problem.

 

[Bald Rick]

One assumes that like all major developments of this nature, the plans will have been revised several times in light of feedback from GBC and others.

Also, AIUI, there will be far fewer parking spaces for the development than flats. As others have said, if you're living in the middle of Guildford, next to the station, you will be much less likely to need a car than the average resident of that City.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

I lived in Epsom until about four years ago. The Solum project was dire - the subway ceiling leaks in multiple places, and there is a series of yellow warning 'A' boards permanently dotted around to warn of the wet floor. Mineral build-up on the floor has started at these drip spots, which could have been so easily prevented by the simple use of drip trays fixed to the ceiling and draining correctly. The number of ticket gates is inadequate (especially as at least one is often broken), and the subway fills with people trying to exit every time a peak time train arrives. Of course, with a packed subway, the yellow 'safety' boards become almost invisible and get knocked/tripped over. The exterior still hasn't been properly finished after all these years! The badly-cracked walls of the staircases to the platforms were simply painted over rather than being repaired and re-surfaced/tiled. A shabby and cheap-looking job.

I still live in Epsom and use the station 3 or 4 or more times a month...

The yellow A boards haven't been around for a while except for the base of the 1/2 staircase as mentioned in my earlier post.

I agree with you about the developing stalactites!

As for the exterior - well, it's finished but the imagery on it is not exactly popular amongst the local residents. It's nothing like what we were led to believe it would be like.

Incidentally, and perhaps predictably, of the five sections in the glazed canopy over the main entrance outside, two are now shattered ( but still in place* ) having had objects dropped on them from the flats above.

Indeed it will be "interesting" to see what happens at Guildford.



*Yes, you read that correctly. There are two shattered pieces for glass about 5 feet by ten feet each under which thousands of pedestrians walk daily.

 

[cjmillsnun]

Wasn't Guildford completely rebuilt only about 20 years ago?

Nearer 30 years ago, and it is in a state.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Nearer 30 years ago, and it is in a state.

Blimey - I'm getting older faster than I thought; I can clearly remember the rebuild taking place!

It is, however, a further indictment against modern building standards if a place gets into such a state that it needs a complete rebuild after only 30 years when many of the surviving Victorian buildings around the country - where they have been looked after - are still quite fit for purpose. I guess we need to return to looking at "whole life costs" rather than just what it's going to cost to build...

 

[Paul180]

I do not think there is anything wrong with the current structure OK it is a bit grubby in places what station isn't I think it is NWR wanting to utilise their land more efficiently for more income just like they are doing at the bigger stations.

I can't see the problem with the larger and higher station is out of ceasing withe the town the the current station is not is not easy on master peace if the new station is well designed will look more in place than the current one.

I think the people need to get out more and go in to the town center and have a look around more often and they will find out that Guildford has a mix of buildings and is not full of tudor and victorian buildings especially around by the station.

 

[Deepgreen]

I still live in Epsom and use the station 3 or 4 or more times a month...

The yellow A boards haven't been around for a while except for the base of the 1/2 staircase as mentioned in my earlier post.

I agree with you about the developing stalactites!

As for the exterior - well, it's finished but the imagery on it is not exactly popular amongst the local residents. It's nothing like what we were led to believe it would be like.

Incidentally, and perhaps predictably, of the five sections in the glazed canopy over the main entrance outside, two are now shattered ( but still in place* ) having had objects dropped on them from the flats above.

Indeed it will be "interesting" to see what happens at Guildford.



*Yes, you read that correctly. There are two shattered pieces for glass about 5 feet by ten feet each under which thousands of pedestrians walk daily.

I used it last Thursday and three boards were in place - see attached (slightly blurred) photo. The exterior finishing I was referring to was the detailed trim, etc., which is still missing from several spots, most notably on the Waterloo Road facade.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Hmmm... I haven't spotted that leak in the middle! I'll have a look next time I'm travelling.

Err.. Waterloo Road facade? Do you mean the retail unit on the corner? The only facade against Waterloo Road that I can think of is the brick wall under the triple bridges - they're not part of the station, just the general railway infrastructure.

 

[Deepgreen]

Hmmm... I haven't spotted that leak in the middle! I'll have a look next time I'm travelling.

Err.. Waterloo Road facade? Do you mean the retail unit on the corner? The only facade against Waterloo Road that I can think of is the brick wall under the triple bridges - they're not part of the station, just the general railway infrastructure.

No, I mean the aspect of the 'Travelodge' that faces Waterloo Road - part of the Solum works. There is a grotty 'planting' area on the corner itself (mostly dead or dying box shrubs and drifts of litter) and then a wall with a large window/advertising panel with the lower trim missing (last time I remembered to look the trim sections were lying at the base of the panel, where they have been ever since the structure was 'completed').

The multiple subway ceiling leaks could have been managed properly (and quite cheaply as part of the installation) with drip trays draining behind the vitreous enamel panels (as grouting or other treatments are very unlikely to stop water ingress from the track above), but the water has been left to its own devices.

 

[Surreyman]

Nearer 30 years ago, and it is in a state.

Rebuilt @ 1988/89.
i don't know why you describe it as 'In a State' it is no better or worse than any other large SWT station.
I think it is important to emphasise that the 'Rebuild' being discussed here is really (As per Epsom) primarily a property development by a Property developer linked to Network Rail, which consists mostly of a large number of 'dwelling units' being built on the 'town side' of the station.
As part of the package (Cynics might say a 'sweetener') the developer is promising a new bigger booking hall, new approachs with 'tasteful landscaping' etc etc.
Actual changes to the Railway part of the station are minimal.
There have been proposals kicking around for an extra platform at some time in the future (Gfd has 8 platforms but in reality only 7, as platforms 6 & 7 share a single track and 7 is never used) but as far as I am aware these are not linked to the current proposal.

 

[Barn]

Solum Regeneration (or whoever it actually is) always seem to like to design (and, occasionally, actually build) "pretty" facades with out much concern for the railway behind them.

Solum is Network Rail + Kier.