Cost to build a station car parking space?

[wilbers]

Just read an article about a new car park for a minor station (though presumably the hope is for park and ride to have significantly higher number of passengers than before it opened).

MSN: Car park costing £1m used by just three people in opening week as workers ditch the office

A £1 million car park used by just three cars in its first week has been slammed by residents and taxpayers as "a complete waste of money"

The car park at the village station of Manea, Cambridgeshire, has 112 spaces despite only 2,500 people living there.

112 spaces for £1M, so about £9K per space (for simple flat car park with relatively low land value)

What I was wondering is how does that compare with the cost of providing other new car parks or car park extensions at other stations? If usage of it remains low then the sums look worse, if for example in a year half the spaces were never used then it could be said to be equivalent to £18K per space.

 

[Spartacus]

It's easy to think of it just as laying the tarmac, but the £1m will involve everything from land acquisition, planning, foundations, fencing, drainage, lighting, cctv, bike racks, diversion of two power lines in this case.

The 83 space extension to the car park at Garforth (including resurfacing the old car park) cost £1.2m, so £1m for 112 spaces seems decent value by comparison.

Garforth rail station’s new 333-space car park - fully open from Friday

An extra 83 free car parking spaces will be available at Garforth rail station From Friday 20 December, bringing the total to 333 spaces.

www.westyorks-ca.gov.uk

An extra 83 free car parking spaces will be available at Garforth rail station From Friday 20 December, bringing the total to 333 spaces.

There will be 10 extra blue badge bays, meaning there are 15 in total, thanks to the £1.12 million extension scheme which also includes a new cycle storage shelter.

Although it does seem an unlikely place for a car park like that I bet there's locals who've been complaining about parking for ages, and the comments about people working from home stifling usage are a bit invalid seeing as last years passenger figures were up on the 2017/2018 ones.

 

[Meglos]

A acre of land in Manea with planning permission (which you need to build a car park) will set you back around £750K. This is only week 1, and the car park will effectively last for as long as there is a railway station and private cars in Manea, over time it will reduce on-street parking which will be a benefit to the residents.

 

[The exile]

"A £1 million car park used by just three cars in its first week has been slammed by residents and taxpayers as "a complete waste of money"

The car park at the village station of Manea, Cambridgeshire, has 112 spaces despite only 2,500 people living there

The usual British short-termism! A car park has low operating costs - let’s see what the usage is in 5 years’ time - outside of the school holidays. If it’s still 3 a week, then they were right - it was a waste of money. What do you bet they’ll be complaining about the level of traffic and that they can’t get a parking space!

 

[Diedinium]

In my opinion we do it wrong at so many stations by building massive car parks: with stations that are in the middle of towns or cities Network rail should be allowed to build housing on the land instead (and then sell/rent it in order to make money, much like many of the Japanese railways do), and I don't mean typical suburban/new-build style low density housing, I mean more like mid-high density housing, sort of like the transit oriented development that's been planned/is cropping up around the Elizabeth line. We waste so much valuable land near stations to accommodate a few hundred metal boxes for part of the day, instead it could be generating the railway a huge amount of income instead and help the system finally achieve that so-sought after "profitability".

(The only stations that should have large amounts of parking are those that aren't near to a town and are intended to be park and rides imo)

Anyway, sorry for this random comment here, I know that this wasn't the topic of the thread lol

 

[Horizon22]

Good old local media hyperbole. I thinks it’s admirable it’s been built for the future, considering what is likely to be local housing growth.

I’ve always thought it would be nice to embed integrated transport at such stations and also things like car hire at larger ones for people to continue their journeys, but that’s for another thread.

A first week also hasn’t allowed demand to bed in and awareness of the facilities to grow. Imagine comparing the first week of the Borders Railway or the Okehampton reopening or even the Elizabeth line and using that as definitive data!

 

[greyman42]

A large new car park was recently built at the back of York station by Platform 11. Does anyone know what that might have cost?

 

[Basher]

Back in 2004 I was involved in a PFI scheme at a hospital with car parking and the costs then were £1100 per space, excluding land costs.

 

[Spartacus]

In my opinion we do it wrong at so many stations by building massive car parks: with stations that are in the middle of towns or cities Network rail should be allowed to build housing on the land instead (and then sell/rent it in order to make money, much like many of the Japanese railways do), and I don't mean typical suburban/new-build style low density housing, I mean more like mid-high density housing, sort of like the transit oriented development that's been planned/is cropping up around the Elizabeth line. We waste so much valuable land near stations to accommodate a few hundred metal boxes for part of the day, instead it could be generating the railway a huge amount of income instead and help the system finally achieve that so-sought after "profitability".

(The only stations that should have large amounts of parking are those that aren't near to a town and are intended to be park and rides imo)

Anyway, sorry for this random comment here, I know that this wasn't the topic of the thread lol

Then you're relying on the people living near the station wanting and needing to use the station, while the people who live away from the station and used to use the car parks as a park & ride facility now have nowhere to park so don't, and don't ride either, just driving to their destination, because evidence shows few will switch to any other form of transport, like the bus. All a bit irrelevant for a rural location like Manea though.

 

[ExRes]

In my opinion we do it wrong at so many stations by building massive car parks: with stations that are in the middle of towns or cities Network rail should be allowed to build housing on the land instead (and then sell/rent it in order to make money, much like many of the Japanese railways do), and I don't mean typical suburban/new-build style low density housing, I mean more like mid-high density housing, sort of like the transit oriented development that's been planned/is cropping up around the Elizabeth line. We waste so much valuable land near stations to accommodate a few hundred metal boxes for part of the day, instead it could be generating the railway a huge amount of income instead and help the system finally achieve that so-sought after "profitability".

(The only stations that should have large amounts of parking are those that aren't near to a town and are intended to be park and rides imo)

Anyway, sorry for this random comment here, I know that this wasn't the topic of the thread lol

And what about all the people that live outside of the town area that need to use the station because it's the only one, where do they park every day or are you in favour of forcing them to move into town?

 

[geoffk]

Several new or fairly new stations in urban areas have two or three spaces for disabled users only. In my home area, Newcourt and Marsh Barton are like this, but also Crosskeys on the Ebbw Vale line. There must be others. None of these are anything like Manea but will the new stations on the Camp Hill line, for example, have this kind of provision?

 

[skyhigh]

A first week also hasn’t allowed demand to bed in and awareness of the facilities to grow.

It's also a first week that's slap bang in the middle of peak school holiday summer season. And reading the article, the "3 cars in the first week" appears to be derived from two aerial photos. I have no idea what the real usage has been but it's entirely possible the story was fed to the paper by a biased local who had taken photos to support their view.

Essentially it appears a decent facility has been built with forward planning in mind. If the car park had opened and been full in the first week I'd imagine we'd be reading a story about how £1mil had been spent on a car park that was too small.

 

[wilbers]

It's also a first week that's slap bang in the middle of peak school holiday summer season. And reading the article, the "3 cars in the first week" appears to be derived from two aerial photos. I have no idea what the real usage has been but it's entirely possible the story was fed to the paper by a biased local who had taken photos to support their view.

Essentially it appears a decent facility has been built with forward planning in mind. If the car park had opened and been full in the first week I'd imagine we'd be reading a story about how £1mil had been spent on a car park that was too small.

Fair point. Car park seemingly too big = news story. Car park too small = news story. Car park built just the right size = a different type of news story that is less likely to be written about.

 

[The exile]

Fair point. Car park seemingly too big = news story. Car park too small = news story. Car park built just the right size = a different type of news story that is less likely to be written about.

Indeed - assuming you accept the public need for any of then, a public car park, train or bus that does not have empty spaces in it is inadequate!

 

[3141]

Nearly twenty years ago I was involved in discussions about improved car parking at a station on the West of England line in Hampshire. The land was already available. NR quoted a figure for improving it which, from memory, worked out at about £8000 per place. It would have required lighting, power for payment machines, and drainage. But not much drainage, because it was a sloping site, and rainwater already ran off it, except where there were holes in the existing tarmac surface. As there is chalk only about twelve inches below the surface, water drained away from the holes quite quickly. There was a general feeling that the quote represented a standard that would be installed regardless of whether the local circumstances required it.

In the late 1990s/early 2000s Chiltern Railways started to install double deck parking at some of their stations. My recollection is that they made it clear they were doing so as economically as reasonably possible. I wonder what those installations cost.

 

[Horizon22]

Several new or fairly new stations in urban areas have two or three spaces for disabled users only. In my home area, Newcourt and Marsh Barton are like this, but also Crosskeys on the Ebbw Vale line. There must be others. None of these are anything like Manea but will the new stations on the Camp Hill line, for example, have this kind of provision?

Pretty sure its transport legislation than ensures there must be a certain ratio of disabled places/overall spaces for new public car parks, so I would suggest so.

 

[Class83]

In my opinion we do it wrong at so many stations by building massive car parks: with stations that are in the middle of towns or cities Network rail should be allowed to build housing on the land instead (and then sell/rent it in order to make money, much like many of the Japanese railways do), and I don't mean typical suburban/new-build style low density housing, I mean more like mid-high density housing, sort of like the transit oriented development that's been planned/is cropping up around the Elizabeth line. We waste so much valuable land near stations to accommodate a few hundred metal boxes for part of the day, instead it could be generating the railway a huge amount of income instead and help the system finally achieve that so-sought after "profitability".

(The only stations that should have large amounts of parking are those that aren't near to a town and are intended to be park and rides imo)

Anyway, sorry for this random comment here, I know that this wasn't the topic of the thread lol

Given the economics of connecting services, all mainline stations should have a good sized car park to enable park and ride, combining rail for the journey to London (or another city) where train is best and car for the station to home where it likely is, attracting more customers to increase revenue and pay for the railway requires a service which meets the customers needs.

Though at many stations, particularly tube stations in outer London where it was somewhat controversial, a 2/3 level carpark with flats above could combine both.

 

[greatkingrat]

The cost of a car park is not proportional to the number of spaces. Building a 50 space car park wouldn't have been half the cost of a 100 space car park. So once you have made the decision to build a car park in the first place, you might as well put in as many spaces as can fit in the available land.

 

[The exile]

In my opinion we do it wrong at so many stations by building massive car parks: with stations that are in the middle of towns or cities Network rail should be allowed to build housing on the land instead (and then sell/rent it in order to make money, much like many of the Japanese railways do), and I don't mean typical suburban/new-build style low density housing, I mean more like mid-high density housing, sort of like the transit oriented development that's been planned/is cropping up around the Elizabeth line. We waste so much valuable land near stations to accommodate a few hundred metal boxes for part of the day, instead it could be generating the railway a huge amount of income instead and help the system finally achieve that so-sought after "profitability".

(The only stations that should have large amounts of parking are those that aren't near to a town and are intended to be park and rides imo)

Anyway, sorry for this random comment here, I know that this wasn't the topic of the thread lol

I would agree with you - on the condition that the urban area be provided with a dense and frequent (maximum service interval 15 minutes) bus service that runs at times that enables people to get from all areas to the first train and from the last and that these also serve edge of town P&R sites. I have a weekly / twice-weekly evening commitment that involves travelling from my home to a location that is about a 15 minute minute walk from a station on a direct line with a reasonably convenient (though not frequent) evening service. I have a season ticket which means that I could effectively do the journey for nothing - and yet I drive. Why? Two main reasons - although my "home station" is only a twenty minute walk away - that's downhill (about 470 feet in about a mile and a half). Coming home, it's uphill and by that time of night the bus is down to an hourly frequency. Car parking at or near the station is extortionate - so it's car all the way. It annoys me greatly but I'm not prepared to be getting back home dripping with sweat or at nearly midnight.

 

[plugwash]

(The only stations that should have large amounts of parking are those that aren't near to a town and are intended to be park and rides imo)

The problem is we have very few such stations.

So in many cases, stations in smaller towns and/or sattelite towns effectively double up as park and ride locations for the areas surrounding those towns. If you take away the parking from those stations then a lot of people are going to say "screw that" and drive all the way to their destination.

 

[Taunton]

Though at many stations, particularly tube stations in outer London where it was somewhat controversial, a 2/3 level carpark with flats above could combine both.

Flat car parks are cheap per place. Multi-storey car parks are more expensive. Car parks with accommodation (particularly residential) above them are even more so, with all the fire precautions required, which is why they tend not to be built any more. Plus the residents expect a proportion of the spaces for themselves, and with all the pillars etc you don't get as many parking spaces per acre as you might expect.

 

[1955LR]

Is there now any requirement to have electric charging points in new car parks, if so that would jack up the cost. ?

 

[Snow1964]

Is there now any requirement to have electric charging points in new car parks, if so that would jack up the cost. ?

Not yet

But some local councils are starting to make it a standard in planning requirements, so new builds in those areas might need it.
(Usually a low percentage 5-10%, but often with another 15-20% with provision which means adding the cable ducts)

 

[Bald Rick]

I was involved in a number of car park projects 15 years ago - costs then were around £5k a space for surface parking. RPI since then has been about 80%. £5k * 1.8 = £9k….

 

[Elecman]

Is there now any requirement to have electric charging points in new car parks, if so that would jack up the cost. ?

Not a requirement per we, but DfT are pushing for EV installations in railway car parks

 

[800001]

I

A large new car park was recently built at the back of York station by Platform 11. Does anyone know what that might of cost?

can imagine that will be hidden in the ‘York Central’ building costs, as that car park was built so the old one could be demolished for all the building work going on around there.

 

[TheBigD]

At the time of typing this, Manea car park has a grand total of 0 cars in it.

It will be a white elephant for many years.

From personal observation, the station doesn't see anything like that number of passengers, mostly a few people for each train with around 20-30 for the morning train to Cambridge. It's not that unusual for there to be 0 passengers on or off services during the day.

Wonder how long it will be before it is commandeered by the travelling community...


 

 

[david1212]

From here published just over a year ago

Exciting £2m plans for Pershore Train Station revealed

A new bridge and car park will be built at Pershore Railway Station following a £2 million investment.

www.eveshamjournal.co.uk

... the council has also agreed to invest £1.5 million into developing a car park with more than 300 spaces ...

 

[Kite159]

Is there a charge for that new car park at Manea as some might decide not to bother using the 2 hourly train and drive to Ely/Peterborough instead.

 

[swt_passenger]

Pretty sure its transport legislation than ensures there must be a certain ratio of disabled places/overall spaces for new public car parks, so I would suggest so.

I think the point was that there were only spaces for a few disabled users, not questioning the ratio of them. Marsh Barton only has a drop off and a few disabled spaces, there’s no general parking.