County council leadership votes through park and ride axe

The park and ride at Sixways, which is closing in September

The park and ride at Sixways, which is closing in September

First published in News Worcester News: Tom Edwards by , Political Reporter

CONTROVERSIAL plans to axe both of Worcester’s park and rides have been voted through - as tempers flared at County Hall.

Worcestershire County Council’s Conservative leadership has agreed to scrap both the Perdiswell and Sixways facilities from September, saying it became “impossible” to justify keeping them going.

The move, first revealed by your Worcester News yesterday, is part of a plan to save £1.6 million by downgrading scores of bus routes.

During yesterday’s cabinet meeting opposition councillors turned up to say they were “dismayed” with the announcement, but the Conservatives said both sites had been in steady decline for years.

They also revealed usage of the Perdiswell park and ride, which peaked at 450,000 drivers a year in 2008, has now fallen to 274,935, and on some days just 200 cars are on the site.

The Sixways facility, which goes to Worcestershire Royal Hospital, attracted 66,214 users last year, costing the public purse £1.66p in subsidies per customer.

The cabinet also said the bus cuts, which includes scrapping 13 services and changing 52 so in the main, pick-ups become less frequent, was “the best outcome in the circumstances”.

The council needs to save around £100 million by 2018 due to unprecedented cuts in funding and ageing demographics.

The Perdiswell park and ride, which launched in 2001, was the brainchild of the old Labour-Lib Dem Coalition at County Hall and loses £186,000 a year.

Councillor Sue Askin, from the Lib Dem group, said: “I was so dismayed to read about this, it actually overturns previous county council policy.

“The key to park and ride is promoting it - on Saturday the city was absolutely gridlocked.

“I believe this will make congestion worse - I see it’s recommended that people either get another bus or drive, well in Droitwich Road the 144 is already very busy and the 31C is also subject to a reduced service, it’ll be just once an hour.”

She said she was worried about the park and ride sites, which are leased, being left to “decay” and “mothball”.

But Councillor Simon Geraghty, deputy leader and cabinet member for economy, skills and infrastructure, said: “Our plan is to tackle the (A4440) Southern Link Road, that will do far more for Worcester’s congestion than any park and ride.

“Around 23,500 vehicles use that Perdiswell ‘corridor’ but the average weekly use of the park and ride is eleven hundred cars, so we need some perspective on the congestion debate.

“We have listened to the public, who have told us this is not a priority for them.”

During the counter-arguments Councillor Richard Udall, from the Labour group, said the Southern Link was “slowly becoming the yellow brick road”, claiming Cllr Geraghty “believes it’s the answer for everything”.

“We’ve wasted all that money in the last 10 yearspromoting park and ride, it’s all gone up in smoke,” he said.

Councillor Liz Tucker, Lib Dem group leader, said: “Where has the public transport policy gone?

“At the moment it appears to be in the waste bin basket.”

As the debate swung back and forth Councillor John Campion, who sits in the Tory cabinet, said: “To listen to the opposition councillors, you wouldn’t recognise we’ve had an enormous financial downturn which means we have dramatically less to spend.

“As most of the money we have to spend has dramatically reduced, we have difficult decisions to make.

“While it isn’t easy to make these decisions, it’s the best outcome in the circumstances we find ourselves.”

The bus services subsidised by the council is 20 per cent of the total network, and the original plan was to scrap the entire £3 million yearly spend.

It followed a major public consultation last September which led to a whopping 8,500 responses, the largest ever single collection of feedback to the council.

Of the 97 routes which are under threat only 17 are staying exactly the same, and just 13 will vanish altogether.

A handful will be slightly better come September and the rest be less frequent, with some charging higher fares in order to continue.

Talks are ongoing with operators, with new timetables required to be published by the end of July for a September start.

Sixways park and ride opened back in 2009 at a cost of £5.8 million, and loses around £109,000 a year.

When Perdiswell opened to much fanfare in 2001 it cost £2.5 million.

MP WELCOMES THE NEWS FOR UPTON - BUT BUS USERS ARE ANGRY

BUS users and even angry county council staff contacted your Worcester News yesterday to say they felt the park and rides had not been promoted enough.

Their reaction was in stark contrast to West Worcestershire MP Harriett Baldwin, who is pleased about the outcome for Upton, where several threatened routes have been saved from the chop.

Pensioner Brian Gold, 71, of Tolladine Road, who contacted us after seeing our front page yesterday, said: "I use the Sixways service and it's awful to see what they are doing to it.

"If you need to get to the hospital regularly and don't drive you are stuffed. It is a great service, I just don't get it."

One worker at County Hall, who wanted to remain anonymous, said around 11 drivers at both park and rides are now fearing the chop.

"The staff at the park and rides have given them suggestions, from special 'low fare' days to better advertising, but they don't want to listen," he said.

"It seems like they've been waiting for this day to come for ages, they gave up ages ago."

But Mrs Baldwin says she is delighted after the council agreed to keep routes serving Upton and Hanley Castle High School going.

"Restricting bus connections to Upton and to Hanley Castle High School would have been counter-productive for the economic recovery in the town with its new flood defences," she said.

“The council did the right thing in putting the issue out to consultation and it is clear that they were able to listen to this feedback to the bus companies to try and find a solution.

“This is clear evidence of the council listening to public feedback and working with the private sector to find a solution which reduces subsidies and keeps council tax down."

Councillor John Smith, the cabinet member for highways and transport, said: "The officers have worked tirelessly and I believe we've now got an acceptable solution to what is a very emotive issue."

Comments (34)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:27am Tue 10 Jun 14

FIONA346 says...

This is foolhardy....A minimum of 200 cars! so where will they all go then...? into Worcester City Centre no doubt, to congest the City some more, and of course park at the CCs already overpriced parking areas to put money back into the Council... there's a balance needed here...! How can they take the 2008 figure as their peak...of course it was the peak... it was pre-recession...that
's not a fair and true statistical benchmark to use. Have the council even asked the public if they would be prepared to pay 25p or 50p extra per journey...I'm sure there is a compromise to be found...let's see the figures.
This is foolhardy....A minimum of 200 cars! so where will they all go then...? into Worcester City Centre no doubt, to congest the City some more, and of course park at the CCs already overpriced parking areas to put money back into the Council... there's a balance needed here...! How can they take the 2008 figure as their peak...of course it was the peak... it was pre-recession...that 's not a fair and true statistical benchmark to use. Have the council even asked the public if they would be prepared to pay 25p or 50p extra per journey...I'm sure there is a compromise to be found...let's see the figures. FIONA346
  • Score: 3

9:29am Tue 10 Jun 14

CJH says...

Prodger waving goodbye to our money in that picture...
Prodger waving goodbye to our money in that picture... CJH
  • Score: 6

9:44am Tue 10 Jun 14

CJH says...

FIONA346 wrote:
This is foolhardy....A minimum of 200 cars! so where will they all go then...? into Worcester City Centre no doubt, to congest the City some more, and of course park at the CCs already overpriced parking areas to put money back into the Council... there's a balance needed here...! How can they take the 2008 figure as their peak...of course it was the peak... it was pre-recession...that

's not a fair and true statistical benchmark to use. Have the council even asked the public if they would be prepared to pay 25p or 50p extra per journey...I'm sure there is a compromise to be found...let's see the figures.
We have been consulted: "It followed a major public consultation last September which led to a whopping 8,500 responses, the largest ever single collection of feedback to the council". What does that tell you? The money is needed for essential services, not parking for the few (and it is only a few) who use it. I doubt very much that even if the council decided to sell the park and rides as a business they would find any private company willing to take it on. They would have to charge a small fortune per car to make any profit at all. You cannot make people use it if they don't want to! And most of us don't. If you're happy to pay more then get a taxi.
[quote][p][bold]FIONA346[/bold] wrote: This is foolhardy....A minimum of 200 cars! so where will they all go then...? into Worcester City Centre no doubt, to congest the City some more, and of course park at the CCs already overpriced parking areas to put money back into the Council... there's a balance needed here...! How can they take the 2008 figure as their peak...of course it was the peak... it was pre-recession...that 's not a fair and true statistical benchmark to use. Have the council even asked the public if they would be prepared to pay 25p or 50p extra per journey...I'm sure there is a compromise to be found...let's see the figures.[/p][/quote]We have been consulted: "It followed a major public consultation last September which led to a whopping 8,500 responses, the largest ever single collection of feedback to the council". What does that tell you? The money is needed for essential services, not parking for the few (and it is only a few) who use it. I doubt very much that even if the council decided to sell the park and rides as a business they would find any private company willing to take it on. They would have to charge a small fortune per car to make any profit at all. You cannot make people use it if they don't want to! And most of us don't. If you're happy to pay more then get a taxi. CJH
  • Score: 1

9:50am Tue 10 Jun 14

Upsy_Daisy says...

How about putting this service out to tender to see if it can be operated privately before axing it all together? Perhaps First (or another operator) would be able to find a way to run it profitably...
How about putting this service out to tender to see if it can be operated privately before axing it all together? Perhaps First (or another operator) would be able to find a way to run it profitably... Upsy_Daisy
  • Score: 4

10:24am Tue 10 Jun 14

CJH says...

Upsy_Daisy wrote:
How about putting this service out to tender to see if it can be operated privately before axing it all together? Perhaps First (or another operator) would be able to find a way to run it profitably...
They've just cancelled a load of bus services because they're not profitable! If park and ride made any sort of money at all, which it doesn't, the council would hold on to it. It's simple economics. Hopefully the sites can be sold and we can get some of OUR money back which has been squandered on these white elephants.
[quote][p][bold]Upsy_Daisy[/bold] wrote: How about putting this service out to tender to see if it can be operated privately before axing it all together? Perhaps First (or another operator) would be able to find a way to run it profitably...[/p][/quote]They've just cancelled a load of bus services because they're not profitable! If park and ride made any sort of money at all, which it doesn't, the council would hold on to it. It's simple economics. Hopefully the sites can be sold and we can get some of OUR money back which has been squandered on these white elephants. CJH
  • Score: 7

10:32am Tue 10 Jun 14

Hwicce says...

If we've got rid of the P&R at Perdiswell, can we not get rid of the stupid bus lane up The Tything and put in proper width lanes.

A more radical plan would be to make it two lanes out, one lane in as the main problem is getting traffic OUT of the City faster than it is coming in.
If we've got rid of the P&R at Perdiswell, can we not get rid of the stupid bus lane up The Tything and put in proper width lanes. A more radical plan would be to make it two lanes out, one lane in as the main problem is getting traffic OUT of the City faster than it is coming in. Hwicce
  • Score: 15

10:58am Tue 10 Jun 14

FIONA346 says...

If we could have 3 lanes on The Tything, how about the central one being flexible for use 'in' in the morning and 'out' in the evening...like they do on the A1(m) into Bham at peak times?
If we could have 3 lanes on The Tything, how about the central one being flexible for use 'in' in the morning and 'out' in the evening...like they do on the A1(m) into Bham at peak times? FIONA346
  • Score: -1

11:07am Tue 10 Jun 14

CJH says...

FIONA346 wrote:
If we could have 3 lanes on The Tything, how about the central one being flexible for use 'in' in the morning and 'out' in the evening...like they do on the A1(m) into Bham at peak times?
The A1 is a much longer and larger road to start with. The Tything is a shorter road with many small roads joining it. Logistically it would be a nightmare. Let's not throw any more money at Prodger type schemes. And I give you the pointless bus lane at the bottom of Newtown Road as evidence.
[quote][p][bold]FIONA346[/bold] wrote: If we could have 3 lanes on The Tything, how about the central one being flexible for use 'in' in the morning and 'out' in the evening...like they do on the A1(m) into Bham at peak times?[/p][/quote]The A1 is a much longer and larger road to start with. The Tything is a shorter road with many small roads joining it. Logistically it would be a nightmare. Let's not throw any more money at Prodger type schemes. And I give you the pointless bus lane at the bottom of Newtown Road as evidence. CJH
  • Score: 4

11:08am Tue 10 Jun 14

HarpoM says...

Fundamental issue - it is cheaper to park a car in the city centre than to use the park and ride - only in Worcester - how crazy is that?
Why not convert Perdiswell to a park n walk/cycle - encourage people to park there for, say £1 per day.....
Or is that way to sensible for our council to contemplate?
Fundamental issue - it is cheaper to park a car in the city centre than to use the park and ride - only in Worcester - how crazy is that? Why not convert Perdiswell to a park n walk/cycle - encourage people to park there for, say £1 per day..... Or is that way to sensible for our council to contemplate? HarpoM
  • Score: 4

11:27am Tue 10 Jun 14

Hwicce says...

HarpoM wrote:
Fundamental issue - it is cheaper to park a car in the city centre than to use the park and ride - only in Worcester - how crazy is that?
Why not convert Perdiswell to a park n walk/cycle - encourage people to park there for, say £1 per day.....
Or is that way to sensible for our council to contemplate?
How about park n walk/cycle and charge nothing. It costs money to collect money so if it was free the costs will fall as no staff would need to be employed.

Hence we have free parking on the outskirts or pay for it if you go into town.
[quote][p][bold]HarpoM[/bold] wrote: Fundamental issue - it is cheaper to park a car in the city centre than to use the park and ride - only in Worcester - how crazy is that? Why not convert Perdiswell to a park n walk/cycle - encourage people to park there for, say £1 per day..... Or is that way to sensible for our council to contemplate?[/p][/quote]How about park n walk/cycle and charge nothing. It costs money to collect money so if it was free the costs will fall as no staff would need to be employed. Hence we have free parking on the outskirts or pay for it if you go into town. Hwicce
  • Score: 4

11:34am Tue 10 Jun 14

CJH says...

HarpoM wrote:
Fundamental issue - it is cheaper to park a car in the city centre than to use the park and ride - only in Worcester - how crazy is that?
Why not convert Perdiswell to a park n walk/cycle - encourage people to park there for, say £1 per day.....
Or is that way to sensible for our council to contemplate?
If we don't want to park and ride in on a bus, we certainly won't want to walk or cycle. Do you want to go shopping in Worcester and have to walk all the way there and back with shopping, kids etc. How would the elderly manage that? The majority of people don't want it, have not, and will never use it, and the council have finally woken up to that fact. We must cut our (enormous) losses now and divert the money to essential services. How many peoples lives have been made worse because there have been cutbacks in child services or care for the elderly when it has been wasted on schemes like this. Sell the sites, buiild houses on them, build supermarkets. I don't care what it is, let's just stop any more of these ego trip plans. And use the money where it should have been in the first place.
[quote][p][bold]HarpoM[/bold] wrote: Fundamental issue - it is cheaper to park a car in the city centre than to use the park and ride - only in Worcester - how crazy is that? Why not convert Perdiswell to a park n walk/cycle - encourage people to park there for, say £1 per day..... Or is that way to sensible for our council to contemplate?[/p][/quote]If we don't want to park and ride in on a bus, we certainly won't want to walk or cycle. Do you want to go shopping in Worcester and have to walk all the way there and back with shopping, kids etc. How would the elderly manage that? The majority of people don't want it, have not, and will never use it, and the council have finally woken up to that fact. We must cut our (enormous) losses now and divert the money to essential services. How many peoples lives have been made worse because there have been cutbacks in child services or care for the elderly when it has been wasted on schemes like this. Sell the sites, buiild houses on them, build supermarkets. I don't care what it is, let's just stop any more of these ego trip plans. And use the money where it should have been in the first place. CJH
  • Score: 4

11:36am Tue 10 Jun 14

liketoknow says...

CJH wrote:
Prodger waving goodbye to our money in that picture...
there was a similar picture with the 'Diamond ' fiasco. that didn't last long.
[quote][p][bold]CJH[/bold] wrote: Prodger waving goodbye to our money in that picture...[/p][/quote]there was a similar picture with the 'Diamond ' fiasco. that didn't last long. liketoknow
  • Score: 2

11:51am Tue 10 Jun 14

HarpoM says...

CJH wrote:
HarpoM wrote:
Fundamental issue - it is cheaper to park a car in the city centre than to use the park and ride - only in Worcester - how crazy is that?
Why not convert Perdiswell to a park n walk/cycle - encourage people to park there for, say £1 per day.....
Or is that way to sensible for our council to contemplate?
If we don't want to park and ride in on a bus, we certainly won't want to walk or cycle. Do you want to go shopping in Worcester and have to walk all the way there and back with shopping, kids etc. How would the elderly manage that? The majority of people don't want it, have not, and will never use it, and the council have finally woken up to that fact. We must cut our (enormous) losses now and divert the money to essential services. How many peoples lives have been made worse because there have been cutbacks in child services or care for the elderly when it has been wasted on schemes like this. Sell the sites, buiild houses on them, build supermarkets. I don't care what it is, let's just stop any more of these ego trip plans. And use the money where it should have been in the first place.
CJH-what about the commuters that clog up the city centre? How can you speak for a "majority"? I was never asked my opinion on Park n Ride & dont know anyone that was.................
.......
There are interested parties here - commuters, the elderly, families, the disabled. A broad brush approach is wrong.
Demolish county hall, move vastly reduced staff to smaller premises & sell that prime land.........
[quote][p][bold]CJH[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HarpoM[/bold] wrote: Fundamental issue - it is cheaper to park a car in the city centre than to use the park and ride - only in Worcester - how crazy is that? Why not convert Perdiswell to a park n walk/cycle - encourage people to park there for, say £1 per day..... Or is that way to sensible for our council to contemplate?[/p][/quote]If we don't want to park and ride in on a bus, we certainly won't want to walk or cycle. Do you want to go shopping in Worcester and have to walk all the way there and back with shopping, kids etc. How would the elderly manage that? The majority of people don't want it, have not, and will never use it, and the council have finally woken up to that fact. We must cut our (enormous) losses now and divert the money to essential services. How many peoples lives have been made worse because there have been cutbacks in child services or care for the elderly when it has been wasted on schemes like this. Sell the sites, buiild houses on them, build supermarkets. I don't care what it is, let's just stop any more of these ego trip plans. And use the money where it should have been in the first place.[/p][/quote]CJH-what about the commuters that clog up the city centre? How can you speak for a "majority"? I was never asked my opinion on Park n Ride & dont know anyone that was................. ....... There are interested parties here - commuters, the elderly, families, the disabled. A broad brush approach is wrong. Demolish county hall, move vastly reduced staff to smaller premises & sell that prime land......... HarpoM
  • Score: -3

11:56am Tue 10 Jun 14

liketoknow says...

Upsy_Daisy wrote:
How about putting this service out to tender to see if it can be operated privately before axing it all together? Perhaps First (or another operator) would be able to find a way to run it profitably...
I think they did say they were hoping a private operator would take it over. I can't see how it would be viable without subsidies.
[quote][p][bold]Upsy_Daisy[/bold] wrote: How about putting this service out to tender to see if it can be operated privately before axing it all together? Perhaps First (or another operator) would be able to find a way to run it profitably...[/p][/quote]I think they did say they were hoping a private operator would take it over. I can't see how it would be viable without subsidies. liketoknow
  • Score: 5

12:02pm Tue 10 Jun 14

CJH says...

HarpoM wrote:
CJH wrote:
HarpoM wrote:
Fundamental issue - it is cheaper to park a car in the city centre than to use the park and ride - only in Worcester - how crazy is that?
Why not convert Perdiswell to a park n walk/cycle - encourage people to park there for, say £1 per day.....
Or is that way to sensible for our council to contemplate?
If we don't want to park and ride in on a bus, we certainly won't want to walk or cycle. Do you want to go shopping in Worcester and have to walk all the way there and back with shopping, kids etc. How would the elderly manage that? The majority of people don't want it, have not, and will never use it, and the council have finally woken up to that fact. We must cut our (enormous) losses now and divert the money to essential services. How many peoples lives have been made worse because there have been cutbacks in child services or care for the elderly when it has been wasted on schemes like this. Sell the sites, buiild houses on them, build supermarkets. I don't care what it is, let's just stop any more of these ego trip plans. And use the money where it should have been in the first place.
CJH-what about the commuters that clog up the city centre? How can you speak for a "majority"? I was never asked my opinion on Park n Ride & dont know anyone that was.................

.......
There are interested parties here - commuters, the elderly, families, the disabled. A broad brush approach is wrong.
Demolish county hall, move vastly reduced staff to smaller premises & sell that prime land.........
If it was going to work it would have done. How many cars come into Worcester every day? How many use the park and ride? It's simple maths. The majority don't use it, don't want to use it and will never use it. And if you read my comment carefully you'll see I was replying to the suggestion that it should be a park and ride/cycle, not park and ride(bus). Walking and cycling immediately excludes most of the elderly, disabled and families with children.
[quote][p][bold]HarpoM[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CJH[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HarpoM[/bold] wrote: Fundamental issue - it is cheaper to park a car in the city centre than to use the park and ride - only in Worcester - how crazy is that? Why not convert Perdiswell to a park n walk/cycle - encourage people to park there for, say £1 per day..... Or is that way to sensible for our council to contemplate?[/p][/quote]If we don't want to park and ride in on a bus, we certainly won't want to walk or cycle. Do you want to go shopping in Worcester and have to walk all the way there and back with shopping, kids etc. How would the elderly manage that? The majority of people don't want it, have not, and will never use it, and the council have finally woken up to that fact. We must cut our (enormous) losses now and divert the money to essential services. How many peoples lives have been made worse because there have been cutbacks in child services or care for the elderly when it has been wasted on schemes like this. Sell the sites, buiild houses on them, build supermarkets. I don't care what it is, let's just stop any more of these ego trip plans. And use the money where it should have been in the first place.[/p][/quote]CJH-what about the commuters that clog up the city centre? How can you speak for a "majority"? I was never asked my opinion on Park n Ride & dont know anyone that was................. ....... There are interested parties here - commuters, the elderly, families, the disabled. A broad brush approach is wrong. Demolish county hall, move vastly reduced staff to smaller premises & sell that prime land.........[/p][/quote]If it was going to work it would have done. How many cars come into Worcester every day? How many use the park and ride? It's simple maths. The majority don't use it, don't want to use it and will never use it. And if you read my comment carefully you'll see I was replying to the suggestion that it should be a park and ride/cycle, not park and ride(bus). Walking and cycling immediately excludes most of the elderly, disabled and families with children. CJH
  • Score: 2

12:11pm Tue 10 Jun 14

CJH says...

By the way HarpoM, you and everyone else has a chance to voice your opinion on matters like this. All you have to do is register for the Council Viewpoint Panel. So I repeat the quote I put in my original comment: "It followed a major public consultation last September which led to a whopping 8,500 responses, the largest ever single collection of feedback to the council".
By the way HarpoM, you and everyone else has a chance to voice your opinion on matters like this. All you have to do is register for the Council Viewpoint Panel. So I repeat the quote I put in my original comment: "It followed a major public consultation last September which led to a whopping 8,500 responses, the largest ever single collection of feedback to the council". CJH
  • Score: 2

12:28pm Tue 10 Jun 14

Doogie 46 says...

Given that a relatively small number of drivers have used the Park & Ride since its introduction, the argument that its abolition will cause wholesale congestion seems a tad flawed.
I used the Sixways P & R once for a mid morning hospital appointment - outward there was me and one other passenger on board, returning there was only me - hardly a profitable enterprise. Idealogically P & R might be a great idea but if you can`t get people to use it it`s public money down the drain that could be used elsewhere.
Given that a relatively small number of drivers have used the Park & Ride since its introduction, the argument that its abolition will cause wholesale congestion seems a tad flawed. I used the Sixways P & R once for a mid morning hospital appointment - outward there was me and one other passenger on board, returning there was only me - hardly a profitable enterprise. Idealogically P & R might be a great idea but if you can`t get people to use it it`s public money down the drain that could be used elsewhere. Doogie 46
  • Score: 4

12:39pm Tue 10 Jun 14

HarpoM says...

Thank you CJH, I will register as you suggest.
Thank you CJH, I will register as you suggest. HarpoM
  • Score: 2

12:45pm Tue 10 Jun 14

liketoknow says...

CJH wrote:
HarpoM wrote:
Fundamental issue - it is cheaper to park a car in the city centre than to use the park and ride - only in Worcester - how crazy is that?
Why not convert Perdiswell to a park n walk/cycle - encourage people to park there for, say £1 per day.....
Or is that way to sensible for our council to contemplate?
If we don't want to park and ride in on a bus, we certainly won't want to walk or cycle. Do you want to go shopping in Worcester and have to walk all the way there and back with shopping, kids etc. How would the elderly manage that? The majority of people don't want it, have not, and will never use it, and the council have finally woken up to that fact. We must cut our (enormous) losses now and divert the money to essential services. How many peoples lives have been made worse because there have been cutbacks in child services or care for the elderly when it has been wasted on schemes like this. Sell the sites, buiild houses on them, build supermarkets. I don't care what it is, let's just stop any more of these ego trip plans. And use the money where it should have been in the first place.
football stadium?
[quote][p][bold]CJH[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HarpoM[/bold] wrote: Fundamental issue - it is cheaper to park a car in the city centre than to use the park and ride - only in Worcester - how crazy is that? Why not convert Perdiswell to a park n walk/cycle - encourage people to park there for, say £1 per day..... Or is that way to sensible for our council to contemplate?[/p][/quote]If we don't want to park and ride in on a bus, we certainly won't want to walk or cycle. Do you want to go shopping in Worcester and have to walk all the way there and back with shopping, kids etc. How would the elderly manage that? The majority of people don't want it, have not, and will never use it, and the council have finally woken up to that fact. We must cut our (enormous) losses now and divert the money to essential services. How many peoples lives have been made worse because there have been cutbacks in child services or care for the elderly when it has been wasted on schemes like this. Sell the sites, buiild houses on them, build supermarkets. I don't care what it is, let's just stop any more of these ego trip plans. And use the money where it should have been in the first place.[/p][/quote]football stadium? liketoknow
  • Score: -1

12:48pm Tue 10 Jun 14

I'm_not_bitter says...

Doogie 46 wrote:
Given that a relatively small number of drivers have used the Park & Ride since its introduction, the argument that its abolition will cause wholesale congestion seems a tad flawed.
I used the Sixways P & R once for a mid morning hospital appointment - outward there was me and one other passenger on board, returning there was only me - hardly a profitable enterprise. Idealogically P & R might be a great idea but if you can`t get people to use it it`s public money down the drain that could be used elsewhere.
So it will be staff, then, won't it? So what will the average 180 people per day who do use Sixways do when it closes? Try and park at the hospital (yeah... that will work because they have loads of empty parking spaces there, don't they?) or in the surrounding streets?
Or will they be encouraged to use the dwindling public transport network that doesn't go where they want when they need it?
[quote][p][bold]Doogie 46[/bold] wrote: Given that a relatively small number of drivers have used the Park & Ride since its introduction, the argument that its abolition will cause wholesale congestion seems a tad flawed. I used the Sixways P & R once for a mid morning hospital appointment - outward there was me and one other passenger on board, returning there was only me - hardly a profitable enterprise. Idealogically P & R might be a great idea but if you can`t get people to use it it`s public money down the drain that could be used elsewhere.[/p][/quote]So it will be staff, then, won't it? So what will the average 180 people per day who do use Sixways do when it closes? Try and park at the hospital (yeah... that will work because they have loads of empty parking spaces there, don't they?) or in the surrounding streets? Or will they be encouraged to use the dwindling public transport network that doesn't go where they want when they need it? I'm_not_bitter
  • Score: 5

1:04pm Tue 10 Jun 14

thompson9100 says...

When services get dumbed down as they did with P&R, then inevitably people stop using them. Initially the city council ran the service, then first took it in (you can still see one of the old busses they inherited in use all) and then the county council took it over after first had reduced the service frequency. Buses now go less frequently, and so off further in the evening, restricting people to travel when they want and need to. The result is clear in the figures given above. It is an atypical way to show bus routes aren't working and to scrap them. The old service through Perdiswell had the same thing since. A well used service was cut from every 10 to every 20 minutes, this reduced the amount of people so they cut it to every hour, reducing numbers further, and then cut the service completely, before the council put in a new service with buses they bought, which showed potential so guess what? First took the rope over and the busses too! It's not rocket science this public transport thing. It works opposite to the standard apply and demand. Put more buses on, demand will increase, and vice versa.
When services get dumbed down as they did with P&R, then inevitably people stop using them. Initially the city council ran the service, then first took it in (you can still see one of the old busses they inherited in use all) and then the county council took it over after first had reduced the service frequency. Buses now go less frequently, and so off further in the evening, restricting people to travel when they want and need to. The result is clear in the figures given above. It is an atypical way to show bus routes aren't working and to scrap them. The old service through Perdiswell had the same thing since. A well used service was cut from every 10 to every 20 minutes, this reduced the amount of people so they cut it to every hour, reducing numbers further, and then cut the service completely, before the council put in a new service with buses they bought, which showed potential so guess what? First took the rope over and the busses too! It's not rocket science this public transport thing. It works opposite to the standard apply and demand. Put more buses on, demand will increase, and vice versa. thompson9100
  • Score: 4

1:12pm Tue 10 Jun 14

Mike5305 says...

WCC are making the same mistake that Beeching made with the railways. Pruning the network is short sighted in the extreme and has a knock on to the services that remain. People don't use the buses in Worcester because they are poorly promoted and expensive. The problem then is to make the service more attractive because the other problem we have is traffic congestion and consequent pollution.

This WCC administration has no vision other than their own self-interest and no idea of how to deliver 'public services' except than for the lowest possible price. It would be interesting to know if any of the ruling Tory group use the local bus services – I guarantee not one of them will be dependent on a service that they are axing.
WCC are making the same mistake that Beeching made with the railways. Pruning the network is short sighted in the extreme and has a knock on to the services that remain. People don't use the buses in Worcester because they are poorly promoted and expensive. The problem then is to make the service more attractive because the other problem we have is traffic congestion and consequent pollution. This WCC administration has no vision other than their own self-interest and no idea of how to deliver 'public services' except than for the lowest possible price. It would be interesting to know if any of the ruling Tory group use the local bus services – I guarantee not one of them will be dependent on a service that they are axing. Mike5305
  • Score: 10

2:24pm Tue 10 Jun 14

HarpoM says...

Question (& I dont know the answer) - how many cities have abandoned their Park n ride services in the past 5 years.......?
Question (& I dont know the answer) - how many cities have abandoned their Park n ride services in the past 5 years.......? HarpoM
  • Score: 2

3:00pm Tue 10 Jun 14

Hwicce says...

Have a look at

http://www.glouceste
rshireecho.co.uk/New
-bus-lane-proposal-C
heltenham-angers-res
idents/story-2108778
5-detail/story.html

It seems Gloucestershire have the same problems with Councils and Bus Lanes that we do.
Have a look at http://www.glouceste rshireecho.co.uk/New -bus-lane-proposal-C heltenham-angers-res idents/story-2108778 5-detail/story.html It seems Gloucestershire have the same problems with Councils and Bus Lanes that we do. Hwicce
  • Score: 2

3:21pm Tue 10 Jun 14

green49 says...

The P&R was a waste of time as it was heavily subsidised when it opened, when i asked how much its real cost would be i was told not much difference, FIRST dont want it they didnt want it at the beginning it was only the sub money that got them involved, but when you can park in the city people will come into the city, one they wont want to carry stuff from shops on a bus and two maybe most are just lazy, Convience is the word thats why we got cars etc, its the age of the car weather you like it or not.

County councill wanted P&R city council put in car parks? dont they talk to each other to get it sorted? NO as its full of ego seeking carear so called politicians.
The P&R was a waste of time as it was heavily subsidised when it opened, when i asked how much its real cost would be i was told not much difference, FIRST dont want it they didnt want it at the beginning it was only the sub money that got them involved, but when you can park in the city people will come into the city, one they wont want to carry stuff from shops on a bus and two maybe most are just lazy, Convience is the word thats why we got cars etc, its the age of the car weather you like it or not. County councill wanted P&R city council put in car parks? dont they talk to each other to get it sorted? NO as its full of ego seeking carear so called politicians. green49
  • Score: 4

3:22pm Tue 10 Jun 14

green49 says...

Great picture TAXI ohh i mean bus for PRODGER
Great picture TAXI ohh i mean bus for PRODGER green49
  • Score: 4

3:41pm Tue 10 Jun 14

gmoore1207 says...

But Councillor Simon Geraghty, deputy leader and cabinet member for economy, skills and infrastructure, said: “Our plan is to tackle the (A4440) Southern Link Road, that will do far more for Worcester’s congestion than any park and ride. what planet is this man on northern link rd is the answer scrap all bus lanes the one in newtown rd is a joke ref prodger the dodger
But Councillor Simon Geraghty, deputy leader and cabinet member for economy, skills and infrastructure, said: “Our plan is to tackle the (A4440) Southern Link Road, that will do far more for Worcester’s congestion than any park and ride. what planet is this man on northern link rd is the answer scrap all bus lanes the one in newtown rd is a joke ref prodger the dodger gmoore1207
  • Score: -1

4:38pm Tue 10 Jun 14

CJH says...

green49 wrote:
Great picture TAXI ohh i mean bus for PRODGER
I don't think he's ever travelled by bus unless there is a photo opportunity. It's do as I say, not do as I do...
[quote][p][bold]green49[/bold] wrote: Great picture TAXI ohh i mean bus for PRODGER[/p][/quote]I don't think he's ever travelled by bus unless there is a photo opportunity. It's do as I say, not do as I do... CJH
  • Score: 5

7:20pm Tue 10 Jun 14

bmoc55 says...

We can no longer expect the taxpayer to subsidise uneconomic public services.
We can no longer expect the taxpayer to subsidise uneconomic public services. bmoc55
  • Score: 0

7:31pm Tue 10 Jun 14

INosey1 says...

As some of the city car parks are half empty in the day you can see where this decision has come from, more money can be made by getting all those park and riders in to city centre car parks. When oh when will our so called leaders see the logic of a COMPLETE ring road for our city that would take the pressure off the current situation, traffic from the north would have at least another option, Norwich a comparable city has river running through it and has an inner and outer ring road why not Worcester.
As some of the city car parks are half empty in the day you can see where this decision has come from, more money can be made by getting all those park and riders in to city centre car parks. When oh when will our so called leaders see the logic of a COMPLETE ring road for our city that would take the pressure off the current situation, traffic from the north would have at least another option, Norwich a comparable city has river running through it and has an inner and outer ring road why not Worcester. INosey1
  • Score: -2

1:16pm Wed 11 Jun 14

dcobo1727 says...

Another Derick SPEND OUR MONEY Prodger scheme hits the dust how much did he SPEND on bus lanes traffic lights silly traffic management ideas now he is going to cost us all a fortune in charge of fire stations 3000 for operation for fire chief !!!
Another Derick SPEND OUR MONEY Prodger scheme hits the dust how much did he SPEND on bus lanes traffic lights silly traffic management ideas now he is going to cost us all a fortune in charge of fire stations 3000 for operation for fire chief !!! dcobo1727
  • Score: 1

6:00pm Fri 13 Jun 14

Worcester Lad says...

gmoore1207 wrote:
But Councillor Simon Geraghty, deputy leader and cabinet member for economy, skills and infrastructure, said: “Our plan is to tackle the (A4440) Southern Link Road, that will do far more for Worcester’s congestion than any park and ride. what planet is this man on northern link rd is the answer scrap all bus lanes the one in newtown rd is a joke ref prodger the dodger
Councillor Simon Geraghty lives guess where St Johns, so the southern area will benefit while us" northerners" are forgotten
[quote][p][bold]gmoore1207[/bold] wrote: But Councillor Simon Geraghty, deputy leader and cabinet member for economy, skills and infrastructure, said: “Our plan is to tackle the (A4440) Southern Link Road, that will do far more for Worcester’s congestion than any park and ride. what planet is this man on northern link rd is the answer scrap all bus lanes the one in newtown rd is a joke ref prodger the dodger[/p][/quote]Councillor Simon Geraghty lives guess where St Johns, so the southern area will benefit while us" northerners" are forgotten Worcester Lad
  • Score: 3

8:04am Sat 14 Jun 14

imustbeoldiwearacap says...

The P&R failed because our "council leaders" did not have the political will to put in place a strategy to force (by simple economics - make full day parking in the city so expensive that the P&R made sense and make roads within a 2 mile ring around the city centre "residents only") commuters onto the P&R. I live on road that is plagued by city commuters that park inconsiderately - and before anyone comments "that the road is not restricted so anyone can park" it is the drivers who all but abandon their cars where it causes great inconvenience to the residents, refuse collectors, delivery vehicles and worst of all ambulances and fire engines!
The P&R failed because our "council leaders" did not have the political will to put in place a strategy to force (by simple economics - make full day parking in the city so expensive that the P&R made sense and make roads within a 2 mile ring around the city centre "residents only") commuters onto the P&R. I live on road that is plagued by city commuters that park inconsiderately - and before anyone comments "that the road is not restricted so anyone can park" it is the drivers who all but abandon their cars where it causes great inconvenience to the residents, refuse collectors, delivery vehicles and worst of all ambulances and fire engines! imustbeoldiwearacap
  • Score: 3

1:52pm Sun 15 Jun 14

3thinker says...

Its simple Simon.

To tackle congestion we need to make it easier and not harder to use other forms of transport to get around the City.

Improving the by-pass for those that mainly don't want to drive into the City isn't a credible solution. Its costing £ Millions that could have been spent on other low cost and no cost initiatives that could have been used to reduce car use. In case you haven't read it recently, the latter is a key policy in many of the County and City Council's own plans and strategies.
Its simple Simon. To tackle congestion we need to make it easier and not harder to use other forms of transport to get around the City. Improving the by-pass for those that mainly don't want to drive into the City isn't a credible solution. Its costing £ Millions that could have been spent on other low cost and no cost initiatives that could have been used to reduce car use. In case you haven't read it recently, the latter is a key policy in many of the County and City Council's own plans and strategies. 3thinker
  • Score: 1

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree