Park and Ride in Manchester

Chris Tolley wrote:
> Brian Robertson wrote:
>
>> what is the point of picking Stalybridge for a park and ride scheme
>> (Where there seems to be no spare land) as against Guide Bridge
>> (where there is oodles of spare land) and it is nearer to the
>> motorway?
>
> Because there are services from Stalybridge to all main stations in
> Manchester*, whereas Guide Bridge only serves Piccadilly?
>
> * plus to Liverpool, Huddersfield, Leeds, and points east without adding
> any extra stops to existing service patterns.
>
>
> Overall, though, Guide Bridge does look the better option from the point
> of view of the land and M60, and services could be operated to Victoria
> if required, and also, dare we suggest it, to Stockport.
>
> However, joined-up thinking isn't always apparent in the North West's
> railways. Liverpool South Parkway isn't getting as many trains as it
> could do, which lessens its value as a P+R centre - the car park there
> only seems to get about 60% full, according to my observation.
>
> Same Dahn Sarf, though. Harlington Station on the BedPan line is only a
> mile from a junction on the M1, and not only gets just the slow trains,
> but also has a minuscule car park for its potential.
>

Which harks back to the fact that, with potential for 4 tracks and 4
platforms again, as well as lines heading in all directions and loads of
spare land, Guide Bridge should be the transport hub in Tameside, not
Stalybridge. It could relieve a lot of pressure on Piccadilly and seems
a better investment than, for instance, moving Crewe!

Brian.

PS Are you ever going to update your RCH maps website, Chris?

"Chris Tolley" <cjt.7@supanet.com> wrote in message
news:lseg4yd4u7e1.1dyypzsnbxb7v$.dlg@40tude.net...

> However, joined-up thinking isn't always apparent in the North West's
> railways. Liverpool South Parkway isn't getting as many trains as it
> could do, which lessens its value as a P+R centre - the car park there
> only seems to get about 60% full, according to my observation.
>

I see 'LSP' gets calls in the London Midland New St - Lime St 2 tph service
from December.

Seems to be a 10 minute non stop run into Liverpool, almost bound to be 350s
too, so that might help a bit?..

Paul

In message <0001HW.C4A90F2000585E06F0407648@news.eclipse.co.u k>, at
15:49:52 on Sun, 20 Jul 2008, Stimpy <stimpy1997ukm> remarked:
>Interestingly, by many standards, the city centre car parks in Oxford aren't
>*that* expensive - certainly no more so than many towns without a P&R. It's
>the differential between town centre parking prices and P&R prices that makes
>P&R work for the locals

It didn't work for me when I lived near Oxford. The main problem was
having to carry *all* your day's shopping around, rather than going back
to the car to dump it off periodically. So P&R works for "window
shoppers" but not people actually wanting to take stuff home.
--
Roland Perry

In message <1ike1iw.14axbsk1pvroojN%d4g4h4.uk>, at 17:50:30 on
Sun, 20 Jul 2008, "David Horne, _the_ chancellor (*)"
<d4g4h4.uk> remarked:
>>So P&R works for "window
>> shoppers" but not people actually wanting to take stuff home.
>
>Those of us without cars obviously must starve to death, and never have
>any new clothes, furniture etc. :)

You can obtain such things, but only at the expense of greater
inconvenience. P&R is "advertised" as a complete replacement for parking
in shopping areas (that happen to be in town centres) but it is not.

On the other hand I'm a great fan of P&R such as Luton Airport Parkway
(for London) and will continue to use it just as long as they don't kill
the golden goose by overpricing it. (At £36 for 2 days and 7 hours
including travel to St Pancras, at my most recent visit, it's heading in
that direction).
--
Roland Perry

In message <0001HW.C4A961A3006BB4CAF0407648@news.eclipse.co.u k>, at
21:41:55 on Sun, 20 Jul 2008, Stimpy <stimpy1997ukm> remarked:
>> It didn't work for me when I lived near Oxford.
>
>*Near* Oxford means you weren't a local as far as P&R goes :-)

I lived in a village about ten miles away. Was the P&R not aimed at me?

In practice I tended to shop in Reading, despite it being further away,
because of the combination of "out of town" (in fact only a mile out so
well within the town's boundary) shops, and adequate parking for
visitors. It was also my no2 railhead (the first being Hillingdon off
the M40).
--
Roland Perry

> In the past, TPE are reported to have said they will not stop at both Guide
> Bridge & Stalybridge. If they only call at a Guide Bridge Parkway, that will
> break connections for connecting passengers travelling via Manchester
> Victoria. Stalybridge also has slightly better range of local bus
> connections than Guide Bridge, but for best transport interchange, an
> enlarged Ashton station would be more useful, especially if some TPE trains
> could be diverted via Ashton.  .
>
> Bevan


That really is nonsense isn't it?

Yes of course a few people would be inconvenienced by having to start
rail journeys at Guide Bridge rather than Stalybridgem but the fare
box and infinitely more would be better placed to use rail.

Connections via Victoria unavailable via Piccadilly - Eh? Salford
Crescent anyone? or are they going back east from whence they came?

Ashton - a town centre location, yes, and I can think of some very
good arguments to knock down Oldham Towers, but the whole point of
Guide Bridge is its hinterland - Ashton, Hyde, Denton, Openshaw, and
anywhere along the M60 and M67 to boot.

Bus connections - if regional trains were to start stopping there, do
you not think that a bus link to Ashton bus station would not follow?

Inter modal should be the future. Its win win win - which is perhaps
why the TOCs won't go there!

EE507 wrote:
> P&R in Oxford is running out of car park capacity (not helped by
> people using Thornhill as P&R to London, thus providing no economic
> benefit to Oxford)
This is a problem that is going to be hit more and more.

Not only are the people of London taking up more and more of our train
paths with what is becoming virtually a commuter service to London from
Manchester, but they are also taking up all of the car parking spaces.

I still think that we should have passport control at Crewe.

Brian.

"Arthur Figgis" <afiggis@example.com.invalid> wrote
>
> Hmm. Is it like Kent, and there are also Mancunian people?
>
We only distinguish the male of the species into Men of Kent and Kentishmen.
Ladies from Kent are all Fair Maids.

Peter
Kentishman

Charlie

A proper response to the ridiculous TIF proposals is much bigger than
park and ride, but the header is park and ride, so that is what I
wrote about

I believe an outer Manchester Ring - Wigan / Bolton / Bury /
Rochdale / Oldham / Ashton / Staly / Stockport / Navigation Road /
Glazebrook / Warrington CLC/WCML curve / Wigan, with interchanges to
the radial routes, major park and ride and a judicous Metrolink and
bus regime would be a far preferable answer.

Unfortunately the GMPTE consultation is not a dialogue but a question
- "Do you want bananas?" When the answer might be "Apples Oranges and
Pears would be better" but there's no way of saying it -

Its TIF or Nothing to the PTE

In message
<7a727e7b-7f1e-441c-aaf3-8cd00e8b7d82@34g2000hsf..com>, at
16:27:08 on Tue, 22 Jul 2008, TBirdFrank
<frankie@t-bird.freeserve.co.uk> remarked:
>Unfortunately the GMPTE consultation is not a dialogue but a question
>- "Do you want bananas?" When the answer might be "Apples Oranges and
>Pears would be better" but there's no way of saying it

A common problem; in Cambridge the misGuided Bus suffered from a
consultation like that, except the question was "would you like some
nice fruit". It was only afterwards when they revealed that most people
said "yes please", that the only "nice fruit" on their menu was the Bus.
--
Roland Perry