Cambridge South : no parking (and local CCTV is dissuade anyone from stopping near by...)

[Justin Smith]

I was shocked to hear in the Railway Magazine that the new Cambridge South station not only has no parking, but even has CCTV to monitor local roads for "unauthorised stopping with penalties for those who fail to comply". Shades of airports ripping off people by charging them for the "privilege" of dropping their friends off for flights....
How arrogant and authoritarian.
In my view the station deserves to fail

 

[stuu]

A simple web search tells me that the station has a pickup/drop-off area

 

[SynthD]

It has 1000 bike spaces inside, and the busway, about 8 road bus routes, and several nationally significant employers within walking distance. Cars are not part of the target journeys.

Airport stations can be on private land, maybe all those private companies who charge like that are?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Presumably the intention is that the station is primarily for local use and those driving should continue to use both "City" and North which both have large car parks rather than causing excessive traffic at South. Trumpington Park and Ride exists to serve those driving into Cambridge from that side, and as it's on the Busway it's not going to be wildly slower than a train and the bus will take you nearer to where you want to go.

If you really must though presumably there are the hospital car parks. Parkopedia suggests they are hospital use only, but that's fairly hard to enforce as long as you pay.

 

[D1537]

A simple web search tells me that the station has a pickup/drop-off area

It does. And you can't stop at the side of the only nearby access road (Francis Crick Ave) because you'd be liable to be ticketed for blocking a cycle lane (and there are "no parking" signs there anyway).

 

[PGAT]

I was shocked to hear in the Railway Magazine that the new Cambridge South station not only has no parking, but even has CCTV to monitor local roads for "unauthorised stopping with penalties for those who fail to comply". Shades of airports ripping off people by charging them for the "privilege" of dropping their friends off for flights....
How arrogant and authoritarian.
In my view the station deserves to fail

Almost all the users of the station will be walking, cycling or taking the bus to their final destination. Furthermore, those willing to pick up/taxis have their own drop-off point. There is nothing authoritarian about this.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Almost all the users of the station will be walking, cycling or taking the bus to their final destination. Furthermore, those willing to pick up/taxis have their own drop-off point. There is nothing authoritarian about this.

Though it is unusual to have a station without a car park in the outlying London commuter area. Cambridge however is a bit different to most commuter towns, partly in having such a large inbound commuting number (but so does Milton Keynes) and partly in being a very anti car city (only Oxford really gets close).

It is a bit like Bletchley not having a car park I suppose, but you'd have to imagine an alternative MK in which the car wasn't the primary mode of transport.

Personally I don't see why they didn't put parking there, though. There's room and it might have been useful to those driving in from the south intending to go to London, and reducing congestion around "City" a bit. Those going into Cambridge from the south would of course use Trumpington P&R.

 

[Djgr]

There are plenty of stations without parking.

There will always be proposed new stations where car parking will not be possible.

In addition, Cambridge is not really a city for cars.

 

[RUK]

I was shocked to hear in the Railway Magazine that the new Cambridge South station not only has no parking, but even has CCTV to monitor local roads for "unauthorised stopping with penalties for those who fail to comply". Shades of airports ripping off people by charging them for the "privilege" of dropping their friends off for flights....
How arrogant and authoritarian.
In my view the station deserves to fail

Most people don’t drive in Cambridge, which has narrow mediaeval, pre-car streets, poor-condition roads, and very little parking in general - they cycle, walk, or take the bus or train instead. There is a lot of traffic congestion, which dissuades people from driving. Hence, cycling is often a lot quicker than driving or taking the bus. The station won’t fail.

This video gives you an idea of how many multiples of times more cyclists there are than cars in Cambridge, far more than in most other places in the U.K., how congested it is for cars, and how much quicker it is to travel by bike than by car or bus:

 

[PGAT]

Personally I don't see why they didn't put parking there, though. There's room and it might have been useful to those driving in from the south intending to go to London, and reducing congestion around "City" a bit. Those going into Cambridge from the south would of course use Trumpington P&R.

Presumably the rationale is to not induce any more car journeys than there are currently.

No doubt there would have been some people who previously drove to Cambridge Central, and would’ve driven to Cambridge South, but instead found themselves cycling or taking public transport to get there instead.

 

[zwk500]

I was shocked to hear in the Railway Magazine that the new Cambridge South station not only has no parking, but even has CCTV to monitor local roads for "unauthorised stopping with penalties for those who fail to comply". Shades of airports ripping off people by charging them for the "privilege" of dropping their friends off for flights....
How arrogant and authoritarian.

It's incredibly arrogant of motorists to assume they should be allowed to drive everywhere. And Authoritarian of them to demand valuable narrow street space is given up to huge SUVs instead of pedestrians.

In my view the station deserves to fail

It won't fail, there'll be plenty of passengers given the employment nearby and opportunity to hop up to the 'original' Cambridge station.

It is a bit like Bletchley not having a car park I suppose, but you'd have to imagine an alternative MK in which the car wasn't the primary mode of transport.

And an alternative MK where it's a lot denser around transport links.

Personally I don't see why they didn't put parking there, though. There's room and it might have been useful to those driving in from the south intending to go to London, and reducing congestion around "City" a bit. Those going into Cambridge from the south would of course use Trumpington P&R.

Cambridge has the P&Rs, there's a major hospital nearby (so having lots of cars around to cause congestion for ambulances, or additional patients for the A&E, isn't a smart move), and a big song and dance was made about the green credentials - which would have been somewhat harmed if a football pitch's worth of Asphalt was in all the pictures.

Then add in Cambridge's good bus network and excellent cycle usage, and tbh the only thing that stands out for why you would provide parking is the potential revenue the railway is passing on.

 

[Bletchleyite]

There are plenty of stations without parking.

There are, but most are not new-build ones.

There will always be proposed new stations where car parking will not be possible.

Certainly, but this isn't one.

In addition, Cambridge is not really a city for cars.

It is and it isn't. Cambridge itself is a city where a car is an encumbrance, but the rural hinterland is one where it's an essential, similar to Oxford and the reason why both have pretty good P&R provision. With South being on the southern edge of the city, it does seem a missed opportunity to remove park-and-ride-to-London traffic coming from the south from the roads into "City" station and provide for them with a dedicated access. A few might use Trumpington P&R for that and go to City by bus, but hardly any will.

It's not relevant for park-and-ride-to Cambridge traffic, though, as Trumpington handles that.

I suppose, that said, there is Whittlesford Parkway. Maybe the view was that the likely outcome of a car park would be more cars in Cambridge as people switched from that? And unlike Oxford most of the collection of villages to the south of Cambridge have their own station on one line or the other, while the string of stationless villages along the A14 and A428 would more easily reach "City" or North.

 

[sh24]

I think it's great that public transport facilities are being designed around modes other than the car. I say that as someone who hasn't owned a car by choice this millennium.

Very much hope it succeeds (and the initial usage reports imply it will).

 

[Bletchleyite]

It won't fail, there'll be plenty of passengers given the employment nearby and opportunity to hop up to the 'original' Cambridge station.

It certainly won't fail - stations with direct train services to London tend not to unless there's literally nothing there*. What it might do is not reduce traffic to "City", but equally looking at a map most of the villages around south Cambridge have a better option than going towards the city anyway.

* Some would say Aylesbury Vale Parkway did, and in a way it did, but in reality that was foresight - build it while things are good for new stations, and it's there now the housing is coming thick and fast.

 

[blimmo]

Perhaps we can use the space that would have been used for parking next to Cambridge south for housing instead.

 

[ac6000cw]

Re. car parking, there is also Babraham Road P&R car park (1458 spaces, free up to 18 hours), which is the closest P&R to the hospital/biomedical campus, from which you can catch a limited-stop electric bus to the hospital bus station (then walk 15 minutes across the campus to South station) or stay on it to Cambridge station instead - which I do frequently. If you don't want to pay the bus fare, it's about 35 minutes walk from the P&R car park to South station.

Cambridge South station was always intended primarily for inward travel to the hospital/biomedical campus.

If you're driving from south of the city to catch a train southwards, why not head for Whittlesford Parkway/Audley End/Royston stations instead?

 

[Magdalia]

Cambridge South station was always intended primarily for inward travel to the hospital/biomedical campus.

This is correct. Cambridge South was never designed to have any car parking provision. The Biomedical Campus already has more than 20k employees, with more expansion planned. There is also a lot of people going to the hospitals as outpatients or to visit inpatients. The main purpose of the new station is to get those people off Cambridge's congested roads and onto the trains.

Personally I don't see why they didn't put parking there, though. There's room and it might have been useful to those driving in from the south intending to go to London, and reducing congestion around "City" a bit.

There is nowhere to build a station car park, all of the nearby land on the campus side is already allocated for other uses, and there is no road access on the Hobsons Park side.

There are significant access issues too, especially the need to keep the campus roads clear for blue light traffic to the three (soon to be five) hospitals.

It's not relevant for park-and-ride-to Cambridge traffic, though, as Trumpington handles that.

Trumpington is the most convenient Park and Ride for Cambridge South, Stagecoach route A provides a direct link. It has 1600 spaces.

No doubt there would have been some people who previously drove to Cambridge Central, and would’ve driven to Cambridge South, but instead found themselves cycling or taking public transport to get there instead.

Parking at the main Cambridge station (333 spaces) isn't very attractive because of traffic congestion. The main stations with parking for villages in Greater Cambridge are:

Audley End 662 spaces
Royston 517 spaces
Cambridge North 428 spaces
Whittlesford Parkway 348 spaces

Perhaps we can use the space that would have been used for parking next to Cambridge south for housing instead.

It s more important to use campus land for hospitals and laboratories. Any car parking on the biomedical campus needs to be for hospitals and laboratories too, not train passengers.

 

[py_megapixel]

I was shocked to hear in the Railway Magazine that the new Cambridge South station not only has no parking, but even has CCTV to monitor local roads for "unauthorised stopping with penalties for those who fail to comply". Shades of airports ripping off people by charging them for the "privilege" of dropping their friends off for flights....
How arrogant and authoritarian.
In my view the station deserves to fail

Do you have any knowledge of the area that would inform your opinion on whether or not it needs a car park? "I was shocked to hear in the Railway Magazine..." makes it sound like you haven't been there.

I fail to understand what is "arrogant and authoritarian" about building a station without a car park, or about enforcing parking restrictions on neighbouring streets.

It is, on the other hand, very arrogant to write that a station "deserves to fail" purely because it doesn't provide a load of empty space for you to dump a motor vehicle next to it. What about the thousands of people who will walk, wheel, cycle, catch the bus, arrive in a taxi or be dropped off at the station? Do they "deserve" the failure of the station just because you can't drive there?

 

[The exile]

Presumably the intention is that the station is primarily for local use and those driving should continue to use both "City" and North which both have large car parks rather than causing excessive traffic at South. Trumpington Park and Ride exists to serve those driving into Cambridge from that side, and as it's on the Busway it's not going to be wildly slower than a train and the bus will take you nearer to where you want to go.

If you really must though presumably there are the hospital car parks. Parkopedia suggests they are hospital use only, but that's fairly hard to enforce as long as you pay.

Indeed, was not the principal purpose of the station to be a "destination" (not in itself, naturally!) rather than an origin. and to help cut local car use?

 

[mike57]

I am not familiar with the area, but would ask the following questions:

Will the lack of parking mean that some people will decide that a longer drive to another station is not worth the effort, and decide to complete the whole journey by car, instead of using the train.

Would parking here reduce congestion/car journeys within the Cambridge area. i.e. people travelling in from the wider area dont have to continue to the main station.

If the answer to either of these questions is yes, then are the numbers significant? If they are then lack of parking was a bad idea, on the other hand if the answers are 'no' then why spend money on providing something which is not going to be of benefit to the wider area.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If the answer to either of these questions is yes, then are the numbers significant? If they are then lack of parking was a bad idea, on the other hand if the answers are 'no' then why spend money on providing something which is not going to be of benefit to the wider area.

The money won't be the issue. Parking at car parks at London commuter stations tends to cost £10 or more, and so they are almost certainly highly profitable, particularly multi storeys as this would be if there was one as their land take is small (and you can even put stuff on top, e.g. this Premier Inn*).

* https://www.google.com/maps/@53.741...try=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI2MDgyNC4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw==

Streetview link to a view of Hull Premier Inn which is atop a multi storey car park.

 

[The exile]

I am not familiar with the area, but would ask the following questions:

Will the lack of parking mean that some people will decide that a longer drive to another station is not worth the effort, and decide to complete the whole journey by car, instead of using the train.

Would parking here reduce congestion/car journeys within the Cambridge area. i.e. people travelling in from the wider area dont have to continue to the main station.

If the answer to either of these questions is yes, then are the numbers significant? If they are then lack of parking was a bad idea, on the other hand if the answers are 'no' then why spend money on providing something which is not going to be of benefit to the wider area.

People south of Cambridge who drive to a station be exactly the same options as they did before. What this has done is provide a(mother) way of accessing (particularly) the area without a car.

 

[deltic]

The money won't be the issue. Parking at car parks at London commuter stations tends to cost £10 or more, and so they are almost certainly highly profitable, particularly multi storeys as this would be if there was one as their land take is small (and you can even put stuff on top, e.g. this Premier Inn*).

* https://www.google.com/maps/@53.7418368,-0.3287014,3a,75y,91.09h,126.8t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sucZfFdJ4PgddRbKLGL3M3g!2e0!6shttps://streetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com/v1/thumbnail?cb_client=maps_sv.tactile&w=900&h=600&pitch=-36.796593620285265&panoid=ucZfFdJ4PgddRbKLGL3M3g&yaw=91.09102163269202!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI2MDgyNC4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw==

Streetview link to a view of Hull Premier Inn which is atop a multi storey car park.

A cheap multi-storey is likely to cost you at least £15k per parking space and that is before you add in the cost of land - at £10 a day, 75% occupancy over the year, add in financing and operating costs - it will be at least 10 years before you start seeing a return on your investment.

 

[mike57]

the same options as they did before

But if you want to reduce congestion and car use you have to provide new options. The question is by not providing parking are opportunities being missed?

 

[zwk500]

But if you want to reduce congestion and car use you have to provide new options. The question is by not providing parking are opportunities being missed?

In order to reduce car use you need to encourage people *not to get in the car at all*. By providing parking, you are /encouraging/ car use. In most cases, the trade off is then worth it, but in the case of a fairly urban station where the bus and bicycle is already a viable option, by providing non-car incentives and a strong disincentive to use the car, you are going to be reducing car usage much more effectively than if you provided for people to drive a couple of miles within the city to the station.

What there should really be is a big bike hire option at Trumpington Park & Ride and Cambridge south, so that people who need to drive into Cambridge from the surrounding area use the existing big expanse of tarmac, and then have a cheap/free bike ride to Cambridge South or the city centre. the bike paths are already there, after all.

 

[mickey]

One of the big issues with installing a car park at Cambridge South would have been its attractiveness to those travelling to the campus rather than away from it, effectively allowing them to pay for railway parking without actually using the train. As this would defeat the primary purpose of the station (i.e. attracting inward passengers), it’s entirely reasonable that one wasn’t provided.

 

[Taunton]

Most people don’t drive in Cambridge ... There is a lot of traffic congestion

I can't quite reconcile these two statements. It's a bit like those who say the M25 motorway is unusable because it's full of traffic ...

 

[D1537]

In order to reduce car use you need to encourage people *not to get in the car at all*. By providing parking, you are /encouraging/ car use. In most cases, the trade off is then worth it, but in the case of a fairly urban station where the bus and bicycle is already a viable option, by providing non-car incentives and a strong disincentive to use the car, you are going to be reducing car usage much more effectively than if you provided for people to drive a couple of miles within the city to the station.

For those of us in rural areas with no local station, if we want to use the train we have to drive to the nearest station and leave the car there, which can be very tricky if there is no provided parking.

Having said that, parking charges can then put you off again. To give a local example, Northallerton overflow car park (private) recently closed, leaving not enough parking at the station itself, and leading to complaints from residents that commuters were parking outside their houses. TPEs response was to raise the daily parking charge from £6.80 to £10 (that expires at midnight regardless of what time you arrive), and the 24-hour price from £10 to £17.50...

 

[zwk500]

I can't quite reconcile these two statements.

If the road capacity is very low (say the roads are narrower than modern cars, in e.g. a medieval city centre), then it won't take much traffic to cause serious congestion. If many more people live in the city than the vehicular capacity, then it is possible for both statements to be true at the same time.

For those of us in rural areas with no local station, if we want to use the train we have to drive to the nearest station and leave the car there, which can be very tricky if there is no provided parking.

Which is why I said that in most cases, the trade off of providing parking for people to make the shorter and less impactful trip to the nearest station and then get the train onwards are worth it.

 

[Magdalia]

The money won't be the issue. Parking at car parks at London commuter stations tends to cost £10 or more, and so they are almost certainly highly profitable, particularly multi storeys as this would be if there was one as their land take is small (and you can even put stuff on top, e.g. this Premier Inn*).

* https://www.google.com/maps/@53.7418368,-0.3287014,3a,75y,91.09h,126.8t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sucZfFdJ4PgddRbKLGL3M3g!2e0!6shttps://streetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com/v1/thumbnail?cb_client=maps_sv.tactile&w=900&h=600&pitch=-36.796593620285265&panoid=ucZfFdJ4PgddRbKLGL3M3g&yaw=91.09102163269202!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI2MDgyNC4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw==

Streetview link to a view of Hull Premier Inn which is atop a multi storey car park.

As already explained, there is no land for a car park at Cambridge South.

And if there was, money would be an issue, because it would be far more lucrative to put a commercial building on that land, not a car park for train passengers. For example, it is going to be very difficult to use that land more productively for a station car park than what AstraZeneca might do with it.

At the main Cambridge station, the Ibis Hotel is above a multi storey park, but it is for cycles not cars.

But if you want to reduce congestion and car use you have to provide new options. The question is by not providing parking are opportunities being missed?

Cambridge South station and the trains are the new option that reduces car use and congestion.

What there should really be is a big bike hire option at Trumpington Park & Ride and Cambridge south, so that people who need to drive into Cambridge from the surrounding area use the existing big expanse of tarmac, and then have a cheap/free bike ride to Cambridge South or the city centre. the bike paths are already there, after all.

Cambridge already has a big ebike and escooter hire operation:

https://www.voi.com/city/cambridge

Rent an electrical scooter or bike from Voi and get anywhere in Cambridge in no time. Get the app and go!

Not literally in no time, but almost certainly more quickly than by car.

I can't quite reconcile these two statements. It's a bit like those who say the M25 motorway is unusable because it's full of traffic ...

If you came to Cambridge and looked, then you would see that the Cambridge roads are full of traffic, even though not many people drive. That's because the amount of road capacity is not very big: it is almost entirely narrow single carriageways, with a multitude of traffic lights.

For those of us in rural areas with no local station, if we want to use the train we have to drive to the nearest station and leave the car there, which can be very tricky if there is no provided parking.

As already explained, people in villages around Cambridge will drive to whichever is most convenient of Audley End, Whittlesford Parkway, Royston or Cambridge North. Alternatively they can park at Trumpington and get the bus to Cambridge South, or park at St Ives or Longstanton and get the bus to Cambridge North.