Worcestershire Parkway station progress

[jimm]

No matter how many river bridges you might want to build in Worcester, or where development happens, the roads around them can't be improved without serious demolition projects and you would still be stuck with one station up on a viaduct and another in a less-than-ideal location on the fringe of the central area with difficult access.

 

[jayah]

Did you miss what I said above about Oxford?

800,000 passengers passed through Oxford Parkway in 2016-17, starting from a big fat zero a couple of years earlier. I expect that next month we will see that figure comfortably pass the million for 2017-18. And plenty of other people drive to Thornhill park-and-ride and use the M40 coaches. Hardly a ringing endorsement of the ease of access to Oxford station, is it?

Have you ever tried to reach Lancaster station in a car? Magical mystery tour of the city centre one-way system is a fair description in my experience. Some of my relatives living on the edge of Yorkshire Dales will always take the longer drive to Oxenholme to catch a train rather than go anywhere near Lancaster.

York - yes it's a piece of cake getting to the station in the peak... Exeter St David's is accessible from much of the city without having to go anywhere near the medieval centre.

Precisely, with good planning it is perfectly possible to overcome these difficulties.

I am sure the residents of North Oxford are happy with their new station but it wasn't a result of having two others that much of the city can't reach.

No matter how many river bridges you might want to build in Worcester, or where development happens, the roads around them can't be improved without serious demolition projects and you would still be stuck with one station up on a viaduct and another in a less-than-ideal location on the fringe of the central area with difficult access.

Exeter St David's is a less than ideal location on the fringe of the central area. The difficult access is a problem of planning not geography or history. Yes you will have to knock something down, that is the price of progress. The longer you leave it, the harder it gets.

Lancaster has an inner ring road you circumvent and parking for 160 cars. It doesn't seem like the terminal case you describe even if it isn't as the crow flies.

Oxford Parkway is convenient but was not born from capitulation that two existing station sites aren't fit for purpose.

 

[jayah]

No matter how many river bridges you might want to build in Worcester, or where development happens, the roads around them can't be improved without serious demolition projects and you would still be stuck with one station up on a viaduct and another in a less-than-ideal location on the fringe of the central area with difficult access.

The obvious improvement in Worcester, the northern bypass across green fields, is to be blocked by the new development of 1,400 homes in said fields.

 

[deltic08]

York - yes it's a piece of cake getting to the station in the peak...

Says who? I tried it in the pm peak yesterday and missed my train due to traffic.

 

[jimm]

Says who? I tried it in the pm peak yesterday and missed my train due to traffic.

I was being ever so slightly sarcastic, in the face of the suggestion from jayah above that those other cites with central areas with medieval street patterns, etc - in a similar vein to Worcester - had no problems with access to their railway stations, so there was no need for Worcestershire Parkway station to be built in the first place.

I had a similar experience trying to reach York station myself on a Thursday afternoon just a couple of months ago.

But apparently, solving such issues is, well, a piece of cake...

with good planning it is perfectly possible to overcome these difficulties.

jayah, have you ever even been to Oxford and tried to get to the station (or get almost anywhere in the whole city - in the peaks? If you had, your wouldn't be writing nonsense like this

I am sure the residents of North Oxford are happy with their new station but it wasn't a result of having two others that much of the city can't reach.

No, there's just the one station in central Oxford that is hard to reach.

 

[deltic08]

jayah, have you ever even been to Oxford and tried to get to the station (or get almost anywhere in the whole city - in the peaks? If you had, your wouldn't be writing nonsense like this

I would say most towns and cities are bad in the peaks. One of my railheads, Harrogate, is terrible to reach taking well over an hour only ten miles away. This is where Parkway stations score; easy to reach and plenty of parking.
We really need a station to the north of Harrogate by reinstating part of the old Ripon line and extend the new Leeds-Harrogate service to this station but Harrogate Council are not the slightest bit interested.
They would rather build a bypass but this wouldn't ease the problem as the traffic is local and not through traffic but still keep pressing for new roads. Dinosaur mentality.

 

[Class172]

A few London passengers abandon Shrub Hill so that a few Birmingham passengers can have a chance at parking? This isn't really a solution is it?
Lancaster, Oxford, York, Exeter they were all medieval once. They haven't all been taken hostage by the past though.

No, it's not solution, but if it happens to be one of the side-effects of the opening of the new station then one can hardly complain that it has at least provided a marginal improvement in provision for a number of users.

I am not the one saying for example the single river crossing east to west is an accident of history / geography - my argument is that it is a failure of planning, compounded by authorising more development on the west bank, right across any future northern ring road.

With the exception of the sites between the city centre and Shrub Hill, there really isn't much room left for development on the east side of the river. Much of the open space left within the city boundaries sits within the flood plains of the rivers Severn and Teme; anyone familiar with the area will know that flooding is not a rare occurence.

Worcester effectively faced a choice of dualling the southern by-pass, which has been a congestion hot-spot for many years, or construct a new northern by-pass. The first option provides much greater benefits as the increased capacity not only provides improved travel to Malvern, Bromyard and Herefordshire, but will allow people to access the parkway station much easier; removing the need to travel through the city centre if you live to the west of the city. There are in fact very few routes where carving through the city centre during the day is the quickest: routes to/from the A443 and A44 (Bromyard) to A449 (Kidderminster), but that's about it.

 

[jayah]

No, it's not solution, but if it happens to be one of the side-effects of the opening of the new station then one can hardly complain that it has at least provided a marginal improvement in provision for a number of users.


With the exception of the sites between the city centre and Shrub Hill, there really isn't much room left for development on the east side of the river. Much of the open space left within the city boundaries sits within the flood plains of the rivers Severn and Teme; anyone familiar with the area will know that flooding is not a rare occurence.

Worcester effectively faced a choice of dualling the southern by-pass, which has been a congestion hot-spot for many years, or construct a new northern by-pass. The first option provides much greater benefits as the increased capacity not only provides improved travel to Malvern, Bromyard and Herefordshire, but will allow people to access the parkway station much easier; removing the need to travel through the city centre if you live to the west of the city. There are in fact very few routes where carving through the city centre during the day is the quickest: routes to/from the A443 and A44 (Bromyard) to A449 (Kidderminster), but that's about it.

Why is it a choice between the south and north? Many cities have a road that goes 360 degrees.

Redevelopment isn't about open spaces. There is a lot of low grade industrial land close to the centre around Shrub Hill that needs to be upscaled and can be used to improve traffic and provide missing parking.

 

[jayah]

I was being ever so slightly sarcastic, in the face of the suggestion from jayah above that those other cites with central areas with medieval street patterns, etc - in a similar vein to Worcester - had no problems with access to their railway stations, so there was no need for Worcestershire Parkway station to be built in the first place.

I had a similar experience trying to reach York station myself on a Thursday afternoon just a couple of months ago.

But apparently, solving such issues is, well, a piece of cake...



jayah, have you ever even been to Oxford and tried to get to the station (or get almost anywhere in the whole city - in the peaks? If you had, your wouldn't be writing nonsense like this



No, there's just the one station in central Oxford that is hard to reach.

Did I say a piece of cake? No. Cheap and easy? No.

But this is basic planning. More and more houses built west of the river that still only has one crossing and a failure to develop the run down land around Shrub Hill is lamentable and building the new station only pushes real solutions to these problems further into the distance.

Oxford station car park is over 500 spaces so lots of people do manage to get there. Congestion in Oxford is no excuse for the situation in Worcester and like Worcester it will not / has not been solved by building stations in fields.

 

[jimm]

Did I say a piece of cake? No. Cheap and easy? No.

But this is basic planning. More and more houses built east of the river that still only has one crossing and a failure to develop the run down land around Shrub Hill is lamentable and building the new station only pushes real solutions to these problems further into the distance.

Oxford station car park is over 500 spaces so lots of people do manage to get there. Congestion in Oxford is no excuse for the situation in Worcester and like Worcester it will not / has not been solved by building stations in fields.

I was referring to travel within the city of York to reach its station, which is not a piece of cake - despite you claim that its' a, er, piece of cake, to get to stations in other cities, which it isn't.

As for circumventing the one-way system in Lancaster to reach the station, I can't begin to imagine how the is supposed to be achieved when approaching from the north or north-east of the city centre, or without rat-running in residential streets from other directions.

This is basic planning?

Do you have even a basic knowledge of Worcester - and I don't mean looking at Google maps. I mean extensive hands-on experience of trying to use the road layout in and around the city at all times of the day.

You could build all the river bridges you like, but if the roads they are linked to are clogged up much of the time or flood, like Hylton Road on the west side of the river does pretty much every winter, then it would make no difference at all/

You clearly don't get to Oxford much, otherwise you would know how little use Oxford station car park gets - which was the case long before the Parkway station opened. And congestion in central Worcester can be terrible at just about any time of day. All it can take is one badly parked delivery van to make the middle of the day look like the peaks.

Worcestershire Parkway is being built, it will open next year. End of story.

 

[Llanigraham]

Why is it a choice between the south and north? Many cities have a road that goes 360 degrees.

Does Worcester need that?
Having lived in Worcester for 30 years until 2003, and still having family that live there, I can tell you that it isn't needed. From experience if people form Kidderminster want to go south east they either go around Worcster using the A449, the M5 and the Southern link or they cross the river at Ombersley. And there aren't many people doing either.
I do wonder what experience you have of Worcester?

Redevelopment isn't about open spaces. There is a lot of low grade industrial land close to the centre around Shrub Hill that needs to be upscaled and can be used to improve traffic and provide missing parking.

That "low grade industrial" land is home to many small and sucessful businesses! What do you propose doing with them?
And I am intrigued on how you propose improving access to this area:
Tolladine Rd cannot be improved without major reconstruction of the railway bridges.
Newtown Rd cannot be improved without major reconstruction of the single lane railway bridge.
Access from Lowesmoor Pl is constrained by the canal bridges, narrow roads and protected buildings.
Access from Wylds Lane would need drastic modification of roads through a residential area from London Rd.
Which leaves only access from the newish road up Tallow Hill which (adequate) access is only from City Walls Rd, which is well known as a major bottleneck, and which your "proposal" would aggravate.
Again I do wonder what your experience of Worcester is?

 

[jayah]

I was referring to travel within the city of York to reach its station, which is not a piece of cake - despite you claim that its' a, er, piece of cake, to get to stations in other cities, which it isn't.

I haven't used that expression in either context to which you insinuate.

As for circumventing the one-way system in Lancaster to reach the station, I can't begin to imagine how the is supposed to be achieved when approaching from the north or north-east of the city centre, or without rat-running in residential streets from other directions.

This is basic planning?

Do you have even a basic knowledge of Worcester - and I don't mean looking at Google maps. I mean extensive hands-on experience of trying to use the road layout in and around the city at all times of the day.

You could build all the river bridges you like, but if the roads they are linked to are clogged up much of the time or flood, like Hylton Road on the west side of the river does pretty much every winter, then it would make no difference at all/

You clearly don't get to Oxford much, otherwise you would know how little use Oxford station car park gets - which was the case long before the Parkway station opened. And congestion in central Worcester can be terrible at just about any time of day. All it can take is one badly parked delivery van to make the middle of the day look like the peaks.

Worcestershire Parkway is being built, it will open next year. End of story.

You are in danger of using traffic congestion around Oxford as an excuse for doing nothing to improve access and parking at the existing Worcester stations. The geography is no more difficult than has been overcome elsewhere and as Oxford proves a Parkway does not reduce the need, especially at Worcester where the Parkway car park is about the same size as the one at the "little used" Oxford Station.

I haven't seen the plans for developing Oxford but I would be surprised if they are going to add more housing in the West and leave the fields around the new station empty as Worcester have done.

 

[Class 170101]

Many cities have a road that goes 360 degrees.

London has two. Look how successful thats been.

 

[Class172]

Do you have even a basic knowledge of Worcester - and I don't mean looking at Google maps. I mean extensive hands-on experience of trying to use the road layout in and around the city at all times of the day.

I too have been wondering this. The situation with Worcester certainly can never be fully understood simply by looking at maps. Amongst other things, it requires a local knowledge of the interaction of the city with its nearest neighbours Malvern and Droitwich, which are not far away and hence their impact can’t be ignored. This is why comparisons with Oxford and Exeter cannot really work.

 

[Class172]

I haven't seen the plans for developing Oxford but I would be surprised if they are going to add more housing in the West and leave the fields around the new station empty as Worcester have done.

I will not profess to know Oxford well, but my understanding is that there will never be much development on the west side of the city because much of it is flood plain, and there’s the additional factor that a lot of the land is owned by colleges.

There’s also likely to be far more development near Oxford Parkway by virtue of its proximity to London. The demand for development is much higher — nearby Bicester has had thousands of new houses built over the past decade or so.

 

[jayah]

I will not profess to know Oxford well, but my understanding is that there will never be much development on the west side of the city because much of it is flood plain, and there’s the additional factor that a lot of the land is owned by colleges.

There’s also likely to be far more development near Oxford Parkway by virtue of its proximity to London. The demand for development is much higher — nearby Bicester has had thousands of new houses built over the past decade or so.

It is absurd that a city like Worcester chooses to ignore the new station and develop green fields across town. Car ownership will be 99% in the new estates, no local transport will ever be viable as a result. More congestion, more car journeys, more car parks, totally disintegrated transport.

As seen in Oxford, the Worcester Parkway with a paltry 367 forecast return journeys per day (97% accessed by car) will do nothing to solve any of the underlying problems.

 

[jimm]

I haven't used that expression in either context to which you insinuate.

Who said you did?

I used it - to summarise your implication in a previous post that because certain other cities did not have a Parkway station, then it must be, well, a piece of cake to get to the stations in those places. It isn't. Or were you trying to imply something else?

Nor will 'better planning' make it easier to get to Worcester Shrub Hill - unless you mean bulldozing dual carriageways though large parts of the city and doing all sorts of other things, as Llanigraham pointed out.

You are in danger of using traffic congestion around Oxford as an excuse for doing nothing to improve access and parking at the existing Worcester stations. The geography is no more difficult than has been overcome elsewhere and as Oxford proves a Parkway does not reduce the need, especially at Worcester where the Parkway car park is about the same size as the one at the "little used" Oxford Station.

I haven't seen the plans for developing Oxford but I would be surprised if they are going to add more housing in the West and leave the fields around the new station empty as Worcester have done.

You are in danger of demonstrating - actually you have done it already - that you know nothing at all about Worcester, unlike several others posting here.

You also know appear to know nothing about Oxford. Unless, once again, your 'knowledge' comes from the satellite view on Google maps.

The land between Oxford station and Botley is the Thames floodplain, as Class172 says - and even the existing development off Botley Road should never have been allowed, as it is at permanent risk of flooding,as is well documented in the local media.

The fields around Oxford Parkway are a bit of the city's green belt. Chiltern only got away with building the station there as the site had been previously used for a government grain silo, so was classed as brownfield land. The area is also outside the city boundary, in the Cherwell Council district, so no matter how much Oxford's councillors might want to build there, it's not up to them.

I did not say that Oxford station was little used - you seem to be making a habit of twisting what other people say on this forum at the moment, don't you?

I said that its car park has large numbers of empty spaces most of the time - I happen to know this as a result of 17 years of commuting to and through Oxford.

There is a difference between lots of spaces in the car park being empty and the station being little used.

People get to Oxford station by other means, due to the traffic congestion. Why do you think there are lots of bikes chained up in the large area of cycle racks outside the entrance all the time? They are not an art installation.

 

[jayah]

Who said you did?

I used it - to summarise your implication in a previous post that because certain other cities did not have a Parkway station, then it must be, well, a piece of cake to get to the stations in those places. It isn't. Or were you trying to imply something else?

Your 'summary' of what I said amounts to just making stuff up. Access to these places and parking is much better I have not claimed to be able to eradicate road congestion for you.

Nor will 'better planning' make it easier to get to Worcester Shrub Hill - unless you mean bulldozing dual carriageways though large parts of the city and doing all sorts of other things, as Llanigraham pointed out.

Generally bulldozers are used to demolish things. I am not convinced if a dual carriageway is needed as places like Exeter don't have them. But to remove a few industrial units to create parking yes. Other comparable cities did this many years ago, Worcester is just behind the curve.

You are in danger of demonstrating - actually you have done it already - that you know nothing at all about Worcester, unlike several others posting here.

You also know appear to know nothing about Oxford. Unless, once again, your 'knowledge' comes from the satellite view on Google maps.

The land between Oxford station and Botley is the Thames floodplain, as Class172 says - and even the existing development off Botley Road should never have been allowed, as it is at permanent risk of flooding,as is well documented in the local media.

The fields around Oxford Parkway are a bit of the city's green belt. Chiltern only got away with building the station there as the site had been previously used for a government grain silo, so was classed as brownfield land. The area is also outside the city boundary, in the Cherwell Council district, so no matter how much Oxford's councillors might want to build there, it's not up to them.

I did not say that Oxford station was little used - you seem to be making a habit of twisting what other people say on this forum at the moment, don't you?

I said that its car park has large numbers of empty spaces most of the time - I happen to know this as a result of 17 years of commuting to and through Oxford.

There is a difference between lots of spaces in the car park being empty and the station being little used.

You still can't quantify what you actually mean. Little used car parking and lots of empty spaces are two different things. The parking capacity at Oxford is actually more than Worcester Parkway.

People get to Oxford station by other means, due to the traffic congestion. Why do you think there are lots of bikes chained up in the large area of cycle racks outside the entrance all the time? They are not an art installation.

That is something called integrated transport which also involves giving housing access to local transport which won't happen on these new estates with 99% car ownership.

Green belt is a very outdated concept and doesn't seem to apply south of Worcester. Building a station surrounded by fields, then building houses 3 miles away and have everyone access by car is just daft.

You will tell us next that the car park at Oxford Parkway can be tripled in size on so called Green Belt but you aren't allowed to put a building there that could be accessed without a car.

 

[Llanigraham]

Generally bulldozers are used to demolish things. I am not convinced if a dual carriageway is needed as places like Exeter don't have them. But to remove a few industrial units to create parking yes. Other comparable cities did this many years ago, Worcester is just behind the curve.

Having now checked, do you realise that many of the industrial buildings you propose to demolish, namely the old Heenan & Froude Foundry and Offices, are listed?
Sorry but another example of your lack of research.
I asked you several questions in #281 which you seem to be completely ignoring, I wonder why?
And you have been asked by numerous of us, what is your actuaal knowledge of Worcester?

 

[Weekender]

I must be one of the few on here looking forward to this opening.
I live near Gloucester and spend about a dozen weekends each year with friends near to Oxford Parkway. The journey on Friday or Saturday is easy but coming back on Sunday is a nightmare. London to Cheltenham trains don’t stop at Didcot on Sunday’s and the trains from Didcot arrive at Swindon 10 minutes after the Cheltenham train leaves. If i go via Worcester Shrub Hill the 12:30 to Gloucester is often cancelled due to lack of train crew so I sometimes travel via Birmingham on Cross Country which invariably means standing between Oxford and Birmingham.

 

[2T57]

I must be one of the few on here looking forward to this opening.
I live near Gloucester and spend about a dozen weekends each year with friends near to Oxford Parkway. The journey on Friday or Saturday is easy but coming back on Sunday is a nightmare. London to Cheltenham trains don’t stop at Didcot on Sunday’s and the trains from Didcot arrive at Swindon 10 minutes after the Cheltenham train leaves. If i go via Worcester Shrub Hill the 12:30 to Gloucester is often cancelled due to lack of train crew so I sometimes travel via Birmingham on Cross Country which invariably means standing between Oxford and Birmingham.

I’m with you, Weekender. Worcestershire Parkway gets a thumbs up from me, too. I’m north of the city but frustrated at the length of time it can take driving to Birmingham New St or International – particularly in the peak - in order to board a train for Euston. I will certainly be using Parkway for a journey of a little more than two hours to Paddington with no threat of getting stuck in Worcester city centre traffic.

The new station will appeal to people who are happy to park and ride and live on the west side of Worcester as well, including Malvern, Bromyard and beyond - especially when the works to dual the Carrington Bridge and the A4440 Southern Link to the M5 has been completed.

There is an expectation that CrossCountry services to Bristol and the South West as well as those to Birmingham, the North West and the North East will make calls at Worcestershire Parkway in addition to the Cardiff/Nottingham services.

 

[jimm]

Your 'summary' of what I said amounts to just making stuff up. Access to these places and parking is much better I have not claimed to be able to eradicate road congestion for you.

Really. So why did deltic08 miss a train at York the other day due to getting stuck in congestion on the city's roads?

Why did mordac post the following about Lancaster in response to your remarks?

Have you seen where Lancaster station is? The whole place is very much not a model for public transport integration or anything to do with planning, believe me.

Perhaps access, parking and planning in those cities, and others, is not half as good as you appear to be claiming.

Generally bulldozers are used to demolish things. I am not convinced if a dual carriageway is needed as places like Exeter don't have them. But to remove a few industrial units to create parking yes. Other comparable cities did this many years ago, Worcester is just behind the curve.

Do you actually absorb or understand a single thing anyone says in response to what you post? Most of it quite clearly founded on nothing more than looking at Google maps, as you never say anything that demonstrates any obvious first-hand knowledge of Worcester, or any of the other places you mentioned.

You can lay out 1,000 parking spaces at Shrub Hill but it wouldn't make any difference whatever if actually getting to the station remains as difficult as it is now - and has been for years. Try going back and reading Lllanigraham's post. But what would someone who lived in Worcester for 30 years know about it?

You still can't quantify what you actually mean. Little used car parking and lots of empty spaces are two different things. The parking capacity at Oxford is actually more than Worcester Parkway.

So what if there are more parking spaces? The car parking capacity available at Oxford is hugely underused, in large part due to the extreme difficulty of reaching it because of the city's notorious traffic congestion. Which you would know all about, if you actually knew anything about Oxford

That is something called integrated transport which also involves giving housing access to local transport which won't happen on these new estates with 99% car ownership.

What have new estates got to do with this? The situation at Worcester has prevailed for decades. The idea for the Parkway station dates back to mid-1970s. It came about because people were well aware of the limitations of Shrub Hill and Foregate Street stations even then.

You will tell us next that the car park at Oxford Parkway can be tripled in size on so called Green Belt but you aren't allowed to put a building there that could be accessed without a car.

I'm not aware of any prospect of such a thing happening. Between the station car park and the adjacent Water Eaton bus park-and-ride, there are almost 1,600 spaces available, which appear to be more than enough to be going on with from my first-hand observations when using the station.

During this summer's Oxford resignalling blockade, when park-and-ride spaces were being used to handle the many extra rail passengers from Oxford and beyond seeking an alternative to GWR services, there were still spaces to spare.

There is an expectation that CrossCountry services to Bristol and the South West as well as those to Birmingham, the North West and the North East will make calls at Worcestershire Parkway in addition to the Cardiff/Nottingham services.

I do not know anyone who expects XC services on the Birmingham-Bristol route will be calling at Worcestershire Parkway any time soon. There simply isn't the space on the trains much of the time and with the XC franchise contest being called off, the prospects of higher-capacity rolling stock being provided at long last don't look too rosy.

Not that there is the space on the Birmingham-Cardiffs either, but I expect political pressure has been applied so that the platforms on the Midland line actually get some sort of train service when the station opens.

 

[The Planner]

There is an expectation that CrossCountry services to Bristol and the South West as well as those to Birmingham, the North West and the North East will make calls at Worcestershire Parkway in addition to the Cardiff/Nottingham services.

I will believe the long distance XC services stopping there when I see them. As it stands the NE to SW ones cannot call from what I can see as a stop is going to add 3 or 4 minutes and that causes a clash at Standish with a down train off the Golden Valley. It also causes a few problems at Kings Norton in the other direction.

 

[jayah]

Having now checked, do you realise that many of the industrial buildings you propose to demolish, namely the old Heenan & Froude Foundry and Offices, are listed?
Sorry but another example of your lack of research.
I asked you several questions in #281 which you seem to be completely ignoring, I wonder why?
And you have been asked by numerous of us, what is your actuaal knowledge of Worcester?

My post concerning being a 'hostage to history' covered those points perfectly. I am not going to get into a debate about you can't do this because of a narrow bridge and you can't do that because of something else.

Most other cities did this stuff 40-60 years ago. Listed buildings are not indispensable either. It needs doing, it needed doing many years ago and does not need doing any less thanks to 367 round trips a day at Worcester Parkway.

 

[jayah]

Really. So why did deltic08 miss a train at York the other day due to getting stuck in congestion on the city's roads?

Why did mordac post the following about Lancaster in response to your remarks?



Perhaps access, parking and planning in those cities, and others, is not half as good as you appear to be claiming.



Do you actually absorb or understand a single thing anyone says in response to what you post? Most of it quite clearly founded on nothing more than looking at Google maps, as you never say anything that demonstrates any obvious first-hand knowledge of Worcester, or any of the other places you mentioned.

You can lay out 1,000 parking spaces at Shrub Hill but it wouldn't make any difference whatever if actually getting to the station remains as difficult as it is now - and has been for years. Try going back and reading Lllanigraham's post. But what would someone who lived in Worcester for 30 years know about it?



So what if there are more parking spaces? The car parking capacity available at Oxford is hugely underused, in large part due to the extreme difficulty of reaching it because of the city's notorious traffic congestion. Which you would know all about, if you actually knew anything about Oxford



What have new estates got to do with this? The situation at Worcester has prevailed for decades. The idea for the Parkway station dates back to mid-1970s. It came about because people were well aware of the limitations of Shrub Hill and Foregate Street stations even then.



I'm not aware of any prospect of such a thing happening. Between the station car park and the adjacent Water Eaton bus park-and-ride, there are almost 1,600 spaces available, which appear to be more than enough to be going on with from my first-hand observations when using the station.

During this summer's Oxford resignalling blockade, when park-and-ride spaces were being used to handle the many extra rail passengers from Oxford and beyond seeking an alternative to GWR services, there were still spaces to spare.



I do not know anyone who expects XC services on the Birmingham-Bristol route will be calling at Worcestershire Parkway any time soon. There simply isn't the space on the trains much of the time and with the XC franchise contest being called off, the prospects of higher-capacity rolling stock being provided at long last don't look too rosy.

Not that there is the space on the Birmingham-Cardiffs either, but I expect political pressure has been applied so that the platforms on the Midland line actually get some sort of train service when the station opens.

I have not promised to end congestion for you. Congestion in York is not an excuse for not upgrading access to Worcester stations.

What size was the car park at Bristol Parkway when it was built? It has grown enormously and will grow and grow due to our disintegrated transport and planning system that plants mainline railway stations and large housing developments in equally green fields at opposite ends of the city.

 

[jimm]

I have not promised to end congestion for you. Congestion in York is not an excuse for not upgrading access to Worcester stations.

Who said it was? But when those of us who do actually know something about Worcester keep trying to get through to you how hard it would be to 'upgrade access' to Worcester Shrub Hill, however brilliant the planning might be, you just repeat the same old lines.

No wonder you don't want to get into a debate, when you appear to know next to nothing about Worcester. Or if you do actually know something, you are managing to keep it remarkably well hidden.

 

[Class172]

My post concerning being a 'hostage to history' covered those points perfectly. I am not going to get into a debate about you can't do this because of a narrow bridge and you can't do that because of something else.

Most other cities did this stuff 40-60 years ago. Listed buildings are not indispensable either. It needs doing, it needed doing many years ago and does not need doing any less thanks to 367 round trips a day at Worcester Parkway.

Worcester did this stuff 40-60 years ago. If it didn’t, then how do you explain the existence of City Walls Road and much of the Deansway, whose construction was preceded by the demolition of much of the city walls and the whole Lychgate area, which I think formerly contained a number of terraces and back-to-backs.

Yet again you are only demonstrating a lack of knowledge about Worcester, and many of us have now asked what experience you have of the city, which you seem to avoid answering.

 

[Llanigraham]

My post concerning being a 'hostage to history' covered those points perfectly. I am not going to get into a debate about you can't do this because of a narrow bridge and you can't do that because of something else.

Most other cities did this stuff 40-60 years ago. Listed buildings are not indispensable either. It needs doing, it needed doing many years ago and does not need doing any less thanks to 367 round trips a day at Worcester Parkway.

If I am reading you correctly:
You are ignoring the effect on the owners and employees in the industrial units you wish to destroy.
You are ignoring the fact that some of the buildings are listed and considered to be of historic importance.
You are ignoring the geographic limitations of both current station sites in Worcester.
You are ignoring the physical difficulties of the roads around Shrub Hill Station.
You are ignoring the known, current congestion problems on the roads in the centre of Worcester, which your proposals would worsen.
You are ignoring the economic costs of the alterations needed.
You are ignoring the congestion to the residents of eastern Worcester that these road changes would cause.
You are ignoring the fact that there have been drastic changes to conservation Laws in the last 40 to 60 years.
You are totally ignoring the comments from people who KNOW the city of Worcester.
And finally you are again ignoring the request from numerous of us about your actual knowledge of Worcester.

Have to say this, but I suspect you have never been near Worcester (or Oxford, or York for that matter) and are basing your farcical ideas simply on what is shown on a map. I suggest you start listening to those of us who live, or have lived, or regularly visit the city; they have far better knowledge of the real Worcester than you do.

 

[deltic08]

Really. So why did deltic08 miss a train at York the other day due to getting stuck in congestion on the city's roads?

The only reason I could find for heavier than normal traffic was half term because it wasn't just in York it was along almost the whole 25 miles from Ripon to York. I was a good 10 minutes late for my train but was able to see 88009, my first one in motion, go through almost silently on an infrastructure train whilst waiting for the next.

 

[jayah]

If I am reading you correctly:
You are ignoring the effect on the owners and employees in the industrial units you wish to destroy.
You are ignoring the fact that some of the buildings are listed and considered to be of historic importance.
You are ignoring the geographic limitations of both current station sites in Worcester.
You are ignoring the physical difficulties of the roads around Shrub Hill Station.
You are ignoring the known, current congestion problems on the roads in the centre of Worcester, which your proposals would worsen.
You are ignoring the economic costs of the alterations needed.
You are ignoring the congestion to the residents of eastern Worcester that these road changes would cause.
You are ignoring the fact that there have been drastic changes to conservation Laws in the last 40 to 60 years.
You are totally ignoring the comments from people who KNOW the city of Worcester.
And finally you are again ignoring the request from numerous of us about your actual knowledge of Worcester.

Have to say this, but I suspect you have never been near Worcester (or Oxford, or York for that matter) and are basing your farcical ideas simply on what is shown on a map. I suggest you start listening to those of us who live, or have lived, or regularly visit the city; they have far better knowledge of the real Worcester than you do.

It's called development. Progress. We still manage to build HS2 despite umpteen listed buildings, SSIs, AONBs and the rest.

Bushings roads wider than a single lane and car parks is pretty basic stuff. You call it 'farcical' but most other cities are 40-60 years ahead on these points.

Judging by the comments on their local news, most people in Worcester know their infrastructure is well below par and want something done about it.