SWR to withdraw public access to Guildford Station Footbridge

[DelW]

As a local resident who uses the bridge most days: the existing pedestrian environment up to the station on nearly all approaches is already horrendous, an extra 100m along the Farnham Road Bridge is only as likely to kill me as the rest of it.

I’ve probably walked across the Farnham Road bridge a couple of hundred times, and in my view it simply isn’t an issue. Far worse pavements to walk down in Guildford, including almost every one that you would use to get the either end of the station footbridge on foot, especially Bridge St across the river.

Using the station footbridge (from Guildford Park Road) enables you to avoid all those narrow pavements (including Bridge Street) by walking across the station car park, crossing over Walnut Tree Close, and using the footbridge over the river to get to Bedford Road and the rest of the town centre. Only one road to cross, and no walking alongside heavy traffic. With the station bridge closed, that route becomes significantly longer and less traffic free.

 

[slicedbread]

Thread reopened for @slicedbread to update

Thanks to Cowley for reopening the thread.

I can only apologise for not getting my update in a little quicker. But yes as guessed by others I was going to mention the planning application to remove the agreement for public access.

Watershed has done a much better job than I would of linking to it.

It may be that NR have convinced the planning office of thier need to remove public access. But with it going thorough a planning application assume it will still need to approved by the councilors.

 

[Recessio]

I’ve probably walked across the Farnham Road bridge a couple of hundred times, and in my view it simply isn’t an issue. Far worse pavements to walk down in Guildford, including almost every one that you would use to get the either end of the station footbridge on foot, especially Bridge St across the river.

I agree completely. Going anywhere along that one way system (which is essentially unavoidable if walking from the station to the town centre by any reasonable route) is horrendous. It's almost impressive they've managed to make a road network that is lethal to all parties involved, whether you are walking, cycling, or driving!

Using the station footbridge (from Guildford Park Road) enables you to avoid all those narrow pavements (including Bridge Street) by walking across the station car park, crossing over Walnut Tree Close, and using the footbridge over the river to get to Bedford Road and the rest of the town centre. Only one road to cross, and no walking alongside heavy traffic. With the station bridge closed, that route becomes significantly longer and less traffic free.

You still have to come out onto Onslow Street, which is also very heavy traffic (at least the pavements are wide), and then you're either walking back onto that same lethal one way system with narrow pavements and inadequate crossings by going south onto Onslow Street/Bridge Street, or you wait ages for the crossings to up around and down to Woodbridge Road/Commercial Road, at which point you get run over by a bus coming out of the bus station at Mach 3 anyway. Bridge or no bridge, it's much the same.

If Farnham Road Bridge was the only dodgy part of the road network around the station I'd be more upset by the bridge closure, but the entire town centre road network between the station and most of the commercial centre is inadequate and needs redeveloping, which no doubt would also look at bridge access over the railway line anyway.

 

[Bald Rick]

Using the station footbridge (from Guildford Park Road) enables you to avoid all those narrow pavements (including Bridge Street) by walking across the station car park, crossing over Walnut Tree Close, and using the footbridge over the river to get to Bedford Road and the rest of the town centre. Only one road to cross, and no walking alongside heavy traffic. With the station bridge closed, that route becomes significantly longer and less traffic free.

I’ve had a couple of issues that back way (and of course it wasn’t there when I started walking station to town!). Also seen a mate clouted by a wing mirror on Bridge St. Farnham Road is fine.

 

[DelW]

You still have to come out onto Onslow Street, which is also very heavy traffic (at least the pavements are wide), and then you're either walking back onto that same lethal one way system with narrow pavements and inadequate crossings by going south onto Onslow Street/Bridge Street, or you wait ages for the crossings to up around and down to Woodbridge Road/Commercial Road, at which point you get run over by a bus coming out of the bus station at Mach 3 anyway. Bridge or no bridge, it's much the same.

It's a while since I've used it, but I think you can still go upstairs in Bedford Road car park and use the bridge into the Friary centre (only when that's open of course).

If Farnham Road Bridge was the only dodgy part of the road network around the station I'd be more upset by the bridge closure, but the entire town centre road network between the station and most of the commercial centre is inadequate and needs redeveloping, which no doubt would also look at bridge access over the railway line anyway.

I agree that access between station and town centre is poor, which I think is why the old steel footbridge between Walnut Tree Close and the Odeon was replaced a few years ago by a much wider and more visible one, to try to encourage more people to use that rather than Bridge Street. It does badly need better connections at the town centre end though.

Unfortunately blocking off the station footbridge would mean that route isn't really viable to and from Guildford Park Road and the university.

Sadly Guildford has pedestrian grade separation schemes that just didn't work. The subway from the station under Bridge Street should offer a traffic free walking route to the centre, but the pedestrian route over Friary Bridge and onward through Friary Passage is too convoluted even for those few people who are aware of it to want to go that way. Though if Bridge Street northern pavement is really congested it can be worth going under the subway and using the southern pavement down to the crossings by Wetherspoons.

The whole one way system is a product of 1980s 'car is king' thinking. IIRC there was a proposal a few years ago to close Bridge Street to traffic and make Friary Bridge two-way. Which would have been 'interesting', but is getting a bit OT from the station footbridge.

 

[Bald Rick]

The whole one way system is a product of 1980s 'car is king' thinking.

1970s!

 

[martin butler]

I used to go to Guildford very often, back when i lived in Woking, and I agree that there are problems, with walking routes from one side of the station, to the other,

As I see it, if the biggest problem with the bridge is people avoiding buying a ticket, then the answer is clear, you either close the bridge and make everyone walk round, or NR builds a second bridge that does not link with any platforms, but provides a public right of way across the station, and install barriers at the entrance to the old bridge, to prevent ticketless travel, and increases RP presence at the station.

 

[Recessio]

Also seen a mate clouted by a wing mirror on Bridge St. Farnham Road is fine.

This has happened to me on Bridge Street once, though I must admit I was heavily refreshed at the time.

Conversely driving down Bridge Street I've had to do a couple of emergency stops for people either getting forced/bumped into the road, or crossing without looking, especially near Primark and further up at the unsignalled crossing of Bedford Road and Onslow Street northbound!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Jun 2026 ==

I used to go to Guildford very often, back when i lived in Woking, and I agree that there are problems, with walking routes from one side of the station, to the other,

As I see it, if the biggest problem with the bridge is people avoiding buying a ticket, then the answer is clear, you either close the bridge and make everyone walk round, or NR builds a second bridge that does not link with any platforms, but provides a public right of way across the station, and install barriers at the entrance to the old bridge, to prevent ticketless travel, and increases RP presence at the station.

There's often a BTP presence at Guildford, and they do seem to have fairly often RP blockade. They also did an annoying period where any ticket with a discount/railcard got rejected at the barriers for manual checks which cause massive congestion given there's only one staffed wide access gate, who always seem to give priority to people leaving rather than those coming in who actually have a train to catch...

It'll be interesting to see what GBC decide to do with Network Rails request. I wouldn't be surprised if it increases the desire for a replacement bridge, though I don't think GBC could or would force that as a quid pro quo for closing the access on the current one.

 

[swt_passenger]

As I see it, if the biggest problem with the bridge is people avoiding buying a ticket, then the answer is clear, you either close the bridge and make everyone walk round, or NR builds a second bridge that does not link with any platforms, but provides a public right of way across the station, and install barriers at the entrance to the old bridge, to prevent ticketless travel, and increases RP presence at the station.

There is already a gateline at the Park Road entrance, streetview shows it in place as far back as their oldest images in 2009.

 

[DelW]

There's often a BTP presence at Guildford, and they do seem to have fairly often RP blockade.

With BTP's offices opposite platform 8 they haven't got far to go

They also did an annoying period where any ticket with a discount/railcard got rejected at the barriers for manual checks which cause massive congestion given there's only one staffed wide access gate, who always seem to give priority to people leaving rather than those coming in who actually have a train to catch...

SWR do this regularly, often for several weeks at a time, as one of the regular gateline attendants at my local station has confirmed to me on occasions when having to open the barrier for me yet again. It's very annoying at busy stations and makes unconfident passengers think they've done something wrong. Just another part of SWR management's hostile attitude to their passengers.

There is already a gateline at the Park Road entrance, streetview shows it in place as far back as their oldest images in 2009.

My purely anecdotal impression is that the back entrance is staffed and gated for much shorter periods than the main gate line on the east side.

 

[swt_passenger]

My purely anecdotal impression is that the back entrance is staffed and gated for much shorter periods than the main gate line on the east side.

Yes, I’ve heard that as well. IMHO if they cannot staff it they shouldn’t leave it open.

 

[DelW]

It's a while since I've used it, but I think you can still go upstairs in Bedford Road car park and use the bridge into the Friary centre (only when that's open of course).

It is still possible, I tried it this afternoon as an experiment - 6 minutes from railway station to bus station, with only two quiet road crossings.
Cross the station car park (marked walkway), over Walnut Tree Close (humped crossing, no traffic), over the river, past the Odeon, cross Bedford Road (empty), into Bedford Road car park (moderately insalubrious!), up to the top deck (stairs and ramps) and over the enclosed bridge into the Friary Centre.

I'm not sure there's much real benefit, but it did keep me away from the Friday afternoon traffic mayhem.

 

[Surreyman]

The Guildford Park rd gateline is frequently manned by 'temp' staff, who will open the gate to virtually anyone who asks, presumably to avoid confrontations. Plus the gates are often unmanned in the evenings. It's a Fare dodgers paradise.

 

[Recessio]

The Guildford Park rd gateline is frequently manned by 'temp' staff, who will open the gate to virtually anyone who asks, presumably to avoid confrontations. Plus the gates are often unmanned in the evenings. It's a Fare dodgers paradise.

Indeed I think the bridge pass is only part of the problem of fare dodging. I can understand staff not wanting to risk abuse and attacks, if there isn't BTP presence then I would not expect a staff member to risk trying to stop someone if that person is being aggressive. SWR leaving the gates unstaffed and even open in the evenings definitely doesn't help though, it almost invites fare dodging - I would hope SWR would investigate improving the staffing numbers.

 

[Oldgaloot]

There's a TV show called (something like) "Fare Dodgers - at War with the Law". I can't recall any of it being filmed at Guildford which is odd when you think that according to Network Rail and SWR it's a hotbed of criminality.

I don't know what NR and SWR are up to but given the propensity of organisations to game the planning system I do wonder. Why are so many of the gate-line people agency staff, quite often slight young women? Where are all the rufty-tufty revenue protection people? Horses for courses, and all that.

I've read the public comments in response to the planning application. They could just as well have come from anyone who works in a convenience store and is faced with the occasional aggressive shoplifter. The wording is so similar one to another that I wonder was there (no, surely not) a little bit of coaching.

Anyone who knows Guildford, or just about any other major commuter town, knows that the station can get a bit lairy when half-cut people are going home from the pubs and clubs or getting off the train from London also half-cut. What I'm saying is the bridge can't be the only source of trouble and it's a great comfort to old galoots like me in inclement weather.

Just round the corner in Bridge Street there are doormen looking after the people and the premises at the pubs and clubs. They are generally large and tough-looking. Couldn't NR and SWR find a few similarly qualified people for Guildford?

 

[Surreyman]

There's a TV show called (something like) "Fare Dodgers - at War with the Law". I can't recall any of it being filmed at Guildford which is odd when you think that according to Network Rail and SWR it's a hotbed of criminality.

I don't know what NR and SWR are up to but given the propensity of organisations to game the planning system I do wonder. Why are so many of the gate-line people agency staff, quite often slight young women? Where are all the rufty-tufty revenue protection people? Horses for courses, and all that.

I've read the public comments in response to the planning application. They could just as well have come from anyone who works in a convenience store and is faced with the occasional aggressive shoplifter. The wording is so similar one to another that I wonder was there (no, surely not) a little bit of coaching.

Anyone who knows Guildford, or just about any other major commuter town, knows that the station can get a bit lairy when half-cut people are going home from the pubs and clubs or getting off the train from getting 'tough' London also half-cut. What I'm saying is the bridge can't be the only source of trouble and it's a great comfort to old galoots like me in inclement weather.

Just round the corner in Bridge Street there are doormen looking after the people and the premises at the pubs and clubs. They are generally large and tough-looking. Couldn't NR and SWR find a few similarly qualified people for Guildford?

Much as like the idea of former military staff getting 'tough' with aggressive fare dodgers, modern day reality/laws/policy means that isn't gonna happen, viz supermarket staff sacked for 'having a go'. Hope they close it to non rail ticket holders asap (I will gladly walk a few 100 meters further)

 

[Murray J]

If it's anything like the road bridge at Crewe (and it looks that way on Google Street View), I'm rather glad I won't be affected by this. Narrow, nothing separating the traffic from you, barely wide enough for 2 people to pass each other. Sounds lovely!

I've walked over it loads of times and it's completely fine. It's not especially narrow and traffic is normally so congested round there the risk is phenomenally small. There doesn't need to be any separation when cars are barely capable of the 30mph limit.
I don't think they should close it to public access but suggesting Farnham Road Bridge is a death trap is hilariously inaccurate.

 

[Watershed]

I've walked over it loads of times and it's completely fine. It's not especially narrow and traffic is normally so congested round there the risk is phenomenally small. There doesn't need to be any separation when cars are barely capable of the 30mph limit.
I don't think they should close it to public access but suggesting Farnham Road Bridge is a death trap is hilariously inaccurate.

I'm sure there are times of day when traffic isn't being held up and some vehicles inevitably break the speed limit. In the public comments tens of people noted the fact that the pavement is unsuitable already and that you have to step into the road to pass e.g. someone with a pram. One even noted that the bridge was recently struck after a car had veered off into the pavement. Imagine if someone had been in the way....

I haven't been there so I can't judge it, but I somehow doubt that all of these people are making it up. It certainly sounds a lot less pleasant than using a station footbridge.

 

[Oldgaloot]

It's not only cars and trucks that cause the problem. The pavement is really narrow at the Farnham Road bridge over the railway and there's (IMHO) no room to widen it. Sometimes the very entitled (but morally deficient) ride their bicycles along it at quite high speed. In some ways I don't blame them because the traffic is dangerous to an unprotected individual on a bike.

All that NR and SWR are saying is that like supermarket workers and traffic wardens their people sometimes get a hard time. And SWR lose a few quid they can't be troubled properly to protect. Since the use of the bridge for non-ticket holders was introduced by the agreement from 1988, if it's not always been that way, what's changed? I think society has just fallen apart that little bit. There's a saying that it's only a coat of varnish that holds society together. That suggests there's a wider problem than Guildford station bridge.

I can't see why I and other perfectly harmless people have to be put to inconvenience for the sake of some fare-dodgers, if that's what's going on.

 

[Murray J]

I'm sure there are times of day when traffic isn't being held up and some vehicles inevitably break the speed limit. In the public comments tens of people noted the fact that the pavement is unsuitable already and that you have to step into the road to pass e.g. someone with a pram. One even noted that the bridge was recently struck after a car had veered off into the pavement. Imagine if someone had been in the way....

I haven't been there so I can't judge it, but I somehow doubt that all of these people are making it up. It certainly sounds a lot less pleasant than using a station footbridge.

It wasn't the bridge that was struck, it was a broadband/telecom box at the side of the road by the mini-roundabout (unless there's been a different car crash there recently)
Again, I don't think it's right SWR close the footbridge to public access but normally you can pass people safely, including passing a pram. It's a bit tight but i've never had to step into the road as far as I remember.

 

[Bald Rick]

I'm sure there are times of day when traffic isn't being held up and some vehicles inevitably break the speed limit. In the public comments tens of people noted the fact that the pavement is unsuitable already and that you have to step into the road to pass e.g. someone with a pram. One even noted that the bridge was recently struck after a car had veered off into the pavement. Imagine if someone had been in the way....

I haven't been there so I can't judge it, but I somehow doubt that all of these people are making it up. It certainly sounds a lot less pleasant than using a station footbridge.

As I said upthread, I’ve used it hundreds if not thousands of times as a pedestrian, cyclist and car driver.

I would say it is near impossible to break the 30 speed limit on it, given there is a roundabout at the west end end and the entry to the gyratory at the other; the layout of the bridge itself meaning you can’t see the roundabout from the gyratory and vice versa.

The pavements are each more than wide enough for two or even three people to walk alongside, and easily wide enough for a pedestrain to pass a pushchair. For evidence, look at Google maps street view, where you will see a mum with two kids one each side.

In all my time there I had no idea that the railway bridge was open to all, and even if it was, I would have preferred to use Farnham Road as the bridge is quite claustrophobic; except perhaps in torrential rain, but in that case I wouldn’t be out anyway.

 

[Murray J]

As I said upthread, I’ve used it hundreds if not thousands of times as a pedestrian, cyclist and car driver.

I would say it is near impossible to break the 30 speed limit on it, given there is a roundabout at the west end end and the entry to the gyratory at the other; the layout of the bridge itself meaning you can’t see the roundabout from the gyratory and vice versa.

The pavements are each more than wide enough for two or even three people to walk alongside, and easily wide enough for a pedestrain to pass a pushchair. For evidence, look at Google maps street view, where you will see a mum with two kids one each side.

In all my time there I had no idea that the railway bridge was open to all, and even if it was, I would have preferred to use Farnham Road as the bridge is quite claustrophobic; except perhaps in torrential rain, but in that case I wouldn’t be out anyway.

I'm also not fully convinced it saves much time compared to taking the road bridge, there's probably some time saving based on not having to wait for a space between traffic but that's about it. Probably quicker if you're going across the river to the Odeon but otherwise time savings are limited. Iirc SWR said in the consultation the average time saving is 90 seconds which sounds about right, certainly isn't anymore than that.

 

[Recessio]

I'm also not fully convinced it saves much time compared to taking the road bridge, there's probably some time saving based on not having to wait for a space between traffic but that's about it. Probably quicker if you're going across the river to the Odeon but otherwise time savings are limited. Iirc SWR said in the consultation the average time saving is 90 seconds which sounds about right, certainly isn't anymore than that.

Agreed. In my experience it always takes more than 90 seconds to get the attention of a staff member at the main barriers anyway, they're inevitably always busy dealing with passengers - it must be quite a hectic job manning the gate line there.

 

[DelW]

At least part of the ticketless travel must be a result of SWR's habit of leaving the Guildford Park Road entrance unstaffed, with the gates open. The cynic in me thinks that, once SWR has extinguished the public access, they will 'discover' that there's still a problem, and move to closing the back entrance outside staffed hours, possibly meaning it will only be open at peak times.

If SWR is really interested in reducing ticketless travel, why have stations like Farncombe and London Road been left as fully open at all times?

 

[Recessio]

At least part of the ticketless travel must be a result of SWR's habit of leaving the Guildford Park Road entrance unstaffed, with the gates open. The cynic in me thinks that, once SWR has extinguished the public access, they will 'discover' that there's still a problem, and move to closing the back entrance outside staffed hours, possibly meaning it will only be open at peak times.

If SWR is really interested in reducing ticketless travel, why have stations like Farncombe and London Road been left as fully open at all times?

This is a good point re London Road - I often travel on the New Guildford Line multiple times per week and I can count on one hand the amount of times I've had my ticket checked.

 

[johncrossley]

In the Netherlands, it is common practice to walk through a station to get from one side to the other, including gated stations. You simply tap in and tap out at the other end. When you tap out, the system cancels the journey and you are not charged anything. So anywhere with ITSO or contactless validity (so including Guildford) could allow this if they wanted to.

 

[DelW]

In the Netherlands, it is common practice to walk through a station to get from one side to the other, including gated stations. You simply tap in and tap out at the other end. When you tap out, the system cancels the journey and you are not charged anything. So anywhere with ITSO or contactless validity (so including Guildford) could allow this if they wanted to.

There is no contactless (bank) card validity at Guildford. SWR has an ITSO 'Touch' smartcard, but it's limited in its usefulness and doesn't seem (to me) to be widely used except by commuters, who presumably have a season ticket loaded on it.

 

[johncrossley]

There is no contactless (bank) card validity at Guildford. SWR has an ITSO 'Touch' smartcard, but it's limited in its usefulness and doesn't seem (to me) to be widely used except by commuters, who presumably have a season ticket loaded on it.

My point is, because Guildford has ITSO validity, they could implement a similar system should they so wish. It isn't modern or ground-breaking technology. The Netherlands' OV-Chipkaart has supported this functionality (to go from one side of the station to another) for nearly 20 years. Its successor technologies (the OV-Pas and contactless bank cards) continue that functionality.

 

[Recessio]

In the Netherlands, it is common practice to walk through a station to get from one side to the other, including gated stations. You simply tap in and tap out at the other end. When you tap out, the system cancels the journey and you are not charged anything. So anywhere with ITSO or contactless validity (so including Guildford) could allow this if they wanted to.

This is ripe for fare dodging. Tap in, tap out but stay in the station, then board a train. This is why TfL have charges if you tap in and out at the same station within certain time frames.

 

[Bigfoot]

This is ripe for fare dodging. Tap in, tap out but stay in the station, then board a train. This is why TfL have charges if you tap in and out at the same station within certain time frames.

Tap in tap out within 10 minutes at opposite gate lines no charge, don't tap out, penalty fare is charged.