Walkway stations discussion

[barbette165]

mods note - split from this thread

New Station calendar

Thank you to my predecessors for initially creating and then taking on the updating of this thread. This first post lists only those stations considered to have a good chance of being delivered in a reasonable timescale. I have taken the list ‘as is’ at December 2020 and will update it when...

www.railforums.co.uk

Some details of the project here:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-48662904

A village heavily affected by the decision to scrap the planned M4 relief road is bidding for help to build a £7m railway station there.

Residents of Magor in Monmouthshire have the mainline rail service to London running through the village, but no station.

They want to create a "walkway" station - one with no car parking that travellers will walk or cycle to.

The group is bidding for £75,000 from the Welsh Government to design plans.

This article from 2019 is about the local demand for a “Walkway” station.

I think given the proximity to junction 23A of the M4 they want to make it clear that the station is not a Parkway station and so should not be used as a Park & Ride station for Newport and Cardiff by drivers off the M4. Adding “Walkway” to the station name could help dissuade them.

 

[The exile]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-48662904

This article from 2019 is about the local demand for a “Walkway” station.

I think given the proximity to junction 23A of the M4 they want to make it clear that the station is not a Parkway station and so should not be used as a Park & Ride station for Newport and Cardiff by drivers off the M4. Adding “Walkway” to the station name could help dissuade them.

Putting in a one hour on-street parking ban (with residents’ permits) and rigorously enforcing it would do that more effectively than a name.

 

[duffield]

Walkway would imply to me that it's very far from the settlement. So if anything it's a discouraging thing to add.
...

Whereas I would assume it implied it was in convenient walking distance! So it sounds like the name suffix is failing already as we've both interpreted it completely differently.

I'm basing this on a Parkway station being perhaps around 5 miles from the place it's named after (and I know this varies wildly, I'd maybe expect it to be a bit further for a large city) so I'd project this to a Walkway station being very roughly around a mile away, 15-20 minutes - pushing towards the limit of what a (say) daily commuter would be prepared to walk. Anyhow, this is just my own thoughts which don't necessarily relate at all to the intention of those naming this particular station!

 

[zwk500]

Whereas I would assume it implied it was in convenient walking distance! So it sounds like the name suffix is failing already as we've both interpreted it completely differently.

I'm basing this on a Parkway station being perhaps around 5 miles from the place it's named after (and I know this varies wildly, I'd maybe expect it to be a bit further for a large city) so I'd project this to a Walkway station being very roughly around a mile away, 15-20 minutes - pushing towards the limit of what a (say) daily commuter would be prepared to walk. Anyhow, this is just my own thoughts which don't necessarily relate at all to the intention of those naming this particular station!

If the station is just called 'Place' I'd assume it's in the settlement concerned. If it's called 'Place Walkway', I'd assume there's a reason it's not called just 'Place'. Maybe being 'very' far is overdoing it, but certainly to me the implication of such a suffix would be that once you get off the train, you've still got some way to walk.

 

[Baxenden Bank]

If the station is just called 'Place' I'd assume it's in the settlement concerned. If it's called 'Place Walkway', I'd assume there's a reason it's not called just 'Place'. Maybe being 'very' far is overdoing it, but certainly to me the implication of such a suffix would be that once you get off the train, you've still got some way to walk.

Taking another example, the use of 'Road' as a suffix meaning that the station is nowhere near the named place. Not that Dent station is anywhere near Dent village mind.

If the intention is to dissuade motorists "Magor and Undy - not suitable for car users" would seem a better fit.

 

[Acathater]

Biggest thing in Magor is the brewery, so why not name it after something that's brewed there like Budweiser?

 

[Baxenden Bank]

Biggest thing in Magor is the brewery, so why not name it after something that's brewed there like Budweiser?

Yellow Pee Halt?

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Not that Dent station is anywhere near Dent village mind.

Dent station is, however, conveniently located near the railway line, which is something, I suppose. Wonder why it wasn't ever called 'Cowgill' (or 'Dentdale') though? Too parochial, perhaps?

 

[Baxenden Bank]

Dent station is, however, conveniently near the railway line, which is something, I suppose. Wonder why it wasn't ever called 'Cowgill' though? Too parochial, perhaps?

Which allows me to again raise the old tale.
Q: Why didn't they build the station in the village?
A: Perhaps they wanted it near the railway.

Cowgill would be accurate, or Cowgill for Dent, Dent Road or Coal Road to really confuse people.

 

[barbette165]

How about “Magor and Royston Vasey - a local station for local people”?

 

[Topological]

Severn Tunnel West

 

[Christian Schm]

All the background to the proposed Magor station is at www.magorstation.co.uk

Walkway is indeed a reply to Parkway - presumably Bristol. There’s explicitly no car parking planned (which is not normal for new suburban/rural railway stations). The Walkway idea was always planned like this by the local group, and the original business case (under ‘Documents’ or here) assumes no car parking.

The reason is simple, just a couple of miles down the road is Severn Tunnel Junction, with plenty of car parking. Also, there isn’t really any space for a car park near the proposed station.

This has been accepted by TfW - when they consulted on their work (see here), they agreed to the Walkway concept.

There will be parking restrictions in the local streets around the station, according to the motion approved by the council, see item 6 of the agenda.

 

[Ashley Hill]

Severn Tunnel West

Undy station was between STJ and Magor stations.
Magor with Undy?

 

[JohnRegular]

A station that is within easy walking/cycling distance of the community that it serves, that does not provide any car parking (noting nearby Severn Tunnel Junction), is a completely reasonable idea.

It is also not a new idea and there are plenty of stations on the network like this, there is no need for the 'Walkway' title which is, in my opinion, patronising and liable to agitate a certain type of person (think 'war against the motorist').

 

[61653 HTAFC]

A station that is within easy walking/cycling distance of the community that it serves, that does not provide any car parking (noting nearby Severn Tunnel Junction), is a completely reasonable idea.

It is also not a new idea and there are plenty of stations on the network like this, there is no need for the 'Walkway' title which is, in my opinion, patronising and liable to agitate a certain type of person (think 'war against the motorist').

Agreed, it's a pointless buzzword invented solely so that a councillor can stand next to a nameboard in an election leaflet when they get bumped up into what they hope will be a safe seat in the next General.
I'm not actively opposed to providing a station with no car park, it depends on the local situation for the most part... but all you're guaranteeing with that policy is that nobody will have the option of using the train (from that station at least) for the "last leg" of their journey. Some of the exorbitant parking charges at stations have the same problem- obviously it costs money to provide parking so it can't be free everywhere... But if it's going to cost £20 to leave my car at a station on the outskirts of a city, or the same amount to park in the city centre, then I'm probably just going to do the latter.

There are plenty of stations without car parks though- will they all be rebranded as "Berry Brow Walkway" and so on?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Quite a number of Merseyrail stations have no official parking, though often it develops informally instead, e.g. on the bridge by Aughton Park. It's perfectly normal to have stations like this in urban areas.

 

[The exile]

I'm not actively opposed to providing a station with no car park, it depends on the local situation for the most part... but all you're guaranteeing with that policy is that nobody will have the option of using the train (from that station at least) for the "last leg" of their journey.

“Nobody” is a very sweeping statement - unless of course there are no origins / destinations within whatever any individual deems walking distance. Even then people can be dropped off /picked up (though I accept that a station that is more than (say) 2 miles from the nearest building or point of interest is unlikely to see much use - even with what the Germans delightfully described as K&R facilities (Kiss and Ride = drop-off bay!)

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Quite a number of Merseyrail stations have no official parking, though often it develops informally instead, e.g. on the bridge by Aughton Park. It's perfectly normal to have stations like this in urban areas.

Which isn't always great for local residents. Mirfield in particular had issues with the car park not being big enough for the number of people wanting to use it. Though it could be worse, Kirklees Council in their infinite wisdom decided to introduce charges to a car park very close to Batley station... just two weeks before the station car park (which is free to rail users) closed to be used by the contractors building the footbridge!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Which isn't always great for local residents. Mirfield in particular had issues with the car park not being big enough for the number of people wanting to use it. Though it could be worse, Kirklees Council in their infinite wisdom decided to introduce charges to a car park very close to Batley station... just two weeks before the station car park (which is free to rail users) closed to be used by the contractors building the footbridge!

In the end they can petition for a residents' parking zone if they want. I believe Councils are required to look at it if a certain proportion of residents petition for it, and as it's a money spinner they are usually happy to do it if it's wanted.

With regard to Aughton Park the parked cars on the bridge are probably handy passive traffic calming, though, without them a lot of people would be bombing down Long Lane at 60 having come from the 60 limit outside.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

“Nobody” is a very sweeping statement - unless of course there are no origins / destinations within whatever any individual deems walking distance. Even then people can be dropped off /picked up (though I accept that a station that is more than (say) 2 miles from the nearest building or point of interest is unlikely to see much use - even with what the Germans delightfully described as K&R facilities (Kiss and Ride = drop-off bay!)

It's as sweeping as the decision to not provide ANY parking is. I'm not even arguing that it's a bad idea on the face of it, more that by making that decision you've cut off some of your potential user base. That may well be worth it for a number of reasons, lack of space for a car park for example, or particularly dense residential use in the immediate surroundings. Stations without parking are entirely appropriate for some situations, but some policies are so steadfast in their anti-car posturing that they won't even meet people halfway. A single occupant car isn't a good use of space in cities, so encouraging that driver to park on the outskirts and take a train to the centre is a positive move.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's as sweeping as the decision to not provide ANY parking is. I'm not even arguing that it's a bad idea on the face of it, more that by making that decision you've cut off some of your potential user base. That may well be worth it for a number of reasons, lack of space for a car park for example, or particularly dense residential use in the immediate surroundings. Stations without parking are entirely appropriate for some situations, but some policies are so steadfast in their anti-car posturing that they won't even meet people halfway. A single occupant car isn't a good use of space in cities, so encouraging that driver to park on the outskirts and take a train to the centre is a positive move.

Though sometimes you'll want to direct those cars to a particular station with easy road access (e.g. Maghull North). Town Green and Ormskirk have free car parks (Ormskirk is about a mile and a bit away, Town Green about a kilometre), so there's little reason to want to park at Aughton Park. Indeed I'm not sure why the people who do do that, it might I suppose be because of Merseyrail's nonsensical "no overnight parking" rule which renders all their car parks useless for shift workers. But that policy is stupid and just needs to be dropped.

 

[The exile]

It's as sweeping as the decision to not provide ANY parking is. I'm not even arguing that it's a bad idea on the face of it, more that by making that decision you've cut off some of your potential user base. That may well be worth it for a number of reasons, lack of space for a car park for example, or particularly dense residential use in the immediate surroundings. Stations without parking are entirely appropriate for some situations, but some policies are so steadfast in their anti-car posturing that they won't even meet people halfway. A single occupant car isn't a good use of space in cities, so encouraging that driver to park on the outskirts and take a train to the centre is a positive move.

Well, I must have misunderstood your statement that “nobody will have the option of using the train for the last leg of their journey”, then.

 

[Christian Schm]

Agreed, it's a pointless buzzword invented solely so that a councillor can stand next to a nameboard in an election leaflet when they get bumped up into what they hope will be a safe seat in the next General.
I'm not actively opposed to providing a station with no car park, it depends on the local situation for the most part... but all you're guaranteeing with that policy is that nobody will have the option of using the train (from that station at least) for the "last leg" of their journey. Some of the exorbitant parking charges at stations have the same problem- obviously it costs money to provide parking so it can't be free everywhere... But if it's going to cost £20 to leave my car at a station on the outskirts of a city, or the same amount to park in the city centre, then I'm probably just going to do the latter.

There are plenty of stations without car parks though- will they all be rebranded as "Berry Brow Walkway" and so on?

This has nothing to do with local councillors or MPs, the 'walkway' concept and name came from the local Magor Action Group On Rail.

You say it is just guaranteeing that nobody will have the option of using the train for the 'last leg' of their journey. But that's just not the case, for the majority of stations walk is the most common access mode, there are only very few parkway stations where it is park & ride. In the case of Magor, the business case (which is on the Magor group's website) specificically excludes any trips by park & ride, and only assumes walk, cycle & bus access.

Monmouthshire County Council is also developing plans to ensure that there won't be any parking on local streets. The first draft was consulted upon the at the same time as TfW consulted on the proposed new station in November 2023. For an update (though not much of one) you can listen to September 2025 Monmouthshire Transport Forum meeting (the link is somewhere on the MCC website).

There may be plenty of stations without car parks, but very few new ones. In fact I think it is fair to say that for new station the demand forecasting handbook (and thus Network Rail) has a bit of an obsession with car parking - it first determines overall demand, and then from that determines the expected demand for car parking. But to me that's cart-before-horse methodology, and it currently takes quite a bit of hard work to argue that no, car parking is sometimes not required. Not sure how TfL or TfW do it, but in the case of Magor, if the local group had £1 for everytime they pointed out that STJ (which is a parkway station) is just down the road, and that thus anyone who wants to park & ride can go there, then by now they would probably have enough money to pay for construction of the new walkway station...

 

[61653 HTAFC]

This has nothing to do with local councillors or MPs, the 'walkway' concept and name came from the local Magor Action Group On Rail.

You say it is just guaranteeing that nobody will have the option of using the train for the 'last leg' of their journey. But that's just not the case, for the majority of stations walk is the most common access mode, there are only very few parkway stations where it is park & ride. In the case of Magor, the business case (which is on the Magor group's website) specificically excludes any trips by park & ride, and only assumes walk, cycle & bus access.

Monmouthshire County Council is also developing plans to ensure that there won't be any parking on local streets. The first draft was consulted upon the at the same time as TfW consulted on the proposed new station in November 2023. For an update (though not much of one) you can listen to September 2025 Monmouthshire Transport Forum meeting (the link is somewhere on the MCC website).

There may be plenty of stations without car parks, but very few new ones. In fact I think it is fair to say that for new station the demand forecasting handbook (and thus Network Rail) has a bit of an obsession with car parking - it first determines overall demand, and then from that determines the expected demand for car parking. But to me that's cart-before-horse methodology, and it currently takes quite a bit of hard work to argue that no, car parking is sometimes not required. Not sure how TfL or TfW do it, but in the case of Magor, if the local group had £1 for everytime they pointed out that STJ (which is a parkway station) is just down the road, and that thus anyone who wants to park & ride can go there, then by now they would probably have enough money to pay for construction of the new walkway station...

At this point, and in this thread, we aren't really discussing the Magor station plans though. I'm talking about the concept of "Walkway" stations in general. I can see councils and other bodies wanting to jump on the bandwagon and apply the principles in places that it isn't appropriate. A bit like how Shanks's Pony has been rebranded as "Active Travel".

 

[Christian Schm]

There’s currently exactly one proposed ‘Walkway’ station. (And most of the discussion above is indeed specific to Magor too.)

For new suburban or rural stations the walkway concept is a departure from what Network Rail (and most promoters) usually do.

There are of course many new urban station that have no car park, and many existing stations without one because they were build before the car park mania started. And may well be that there are some new suburban stations that for various reasons won’t get one - though I note that so far in this discussion none has been mentioned.

Where Magor is different is that the local promoters have not just said they don’t need a car park, but then tried hard to ensure that the proposal does take account of what current/modern transport planning thought - like the Welsh active travel guidance. I feel it would be useful if NR and the rail industry, when it comes to design and access wouldn’t be so much stuck in past (and ignore what at least in Wales is the law of the land)

And FWIW active travel is walking, cycling and wheeling (wheel chairs, rollers, etc). What is actually the point of using incorrect grumble?

 

[Topological]

For clarity, what is the law in Wales? How are NR and the rail industry ignoring that law? If there is a genuine law, as opposed to guidance, then it feels like that law should have a lot more coverage.

 

[Farnborough]

... even with what the Germans delightfully described as K&R facilities (Kiss and Ride = drop-off bay!)

Given it's Wales, at Magor, they're missing an opportunity of slapping a £10 drop-off charge

 

[61653 HTAFC]

And may well be that there are some new suburban stations that for various reasons won’t get one - though I note that so far in this discussion none has been mentioned.

It opened in 1992 so it isn't "new" any more, but I did mention Berry Brow as an example of a station with no parking facilities at all. There isn't really room for one, and it wouldn't be much use anyway (with an hourly service if you were using it as a railhead you'd need to time your arrival pretty well, or you may as well stay on the A616 and drive into Huddersfield).

I'm not against the concept of a "Walkway" station where it's appropriate, but it's a very silly name and whoever came up with it should be laughed at.

 

[Nottingham59]

Put the new station at least two miles away from Magor with a big car park well away from the village, so that no residents will be affected by any extra traffic. Then give them a combined footpath/cycle track but no road to the station from the village so they can walk to it, if that's what they want.

Looking at openrailwaymap, the place where the railway crosses the A4810 Queensway might be suitable. Call it "Gwent Europark"

 

[Magdalia]

There may be plenty of stations without car parks, but very few new ones.

Cambridge South says hello! No car parking but 1000 spaces for bicycles.

Put the new station at least two miles away from Magor with a big car park well away from the village, so that no residents will be affected by any extra traffic. Then give them a combined footpath/cycle track but no road to the station from the village so they can walk to it, if that's what they want.

Looking at openrailwaymap, the place where the railway crosses the A4810 Queensway might be suitable. Call it "Gwent Europark"

I'm not very familiar with the area, but, looking at the map, it seems bizarre not to take advantage of the proximity of Junction 23A on the M4.

The reason is simple, just a couple of miles down the road is Severn Tunnel Junction, with plenty of car parking. Also, there isn’t really any space for a car park near the proposed station.

Looking at the map the road access to Severn Tunnel Junction from the M4 is not ideal.

One of the features of Cambridge South is that it has the guided busway and active travel route to and from Trumpington Park and Ride, which is next to Junction 12 of the M11.

If I were sharpening my crayons I would be proposing a Park and Ride near Junction 23A on the M4 and a busway/active travel route between the Park and Ride site and the new station.