• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Least successful new stations

Status
Not open for further replies.

Pigeon

Member
Joined
8 Apr 2015
Messages
804
Especially as free on street parking at WSH.

And it's in Worcester, not... not in Worcester.

...although in terms of parking capacity it's not all that much better than WOF :)

Which is silly, with the amount of no-longer-used sidings land behind it. (And for which access from most directions does not involve the Newtown Road bridge.)

This is the problem on threads like this

A station in a small market town like Okehampton/ Galashiels (where a significant number of the passengers would have to drive from a catchment area of half an hour away) is seen as A Good Thing

A "Parkway" station near a motorway junction (where a significant number of the passengers would have to drive from a catchment area of half an hour away) is seen as A Bad Thing

The former is good because although it's crap, it's a lot less crap than having nothing at all which is what we've got at the moment). It's also a first step on the way to becoming more less crap.

The latter is bad because it's any or all of: a partial or complete replacement of well-used existing facilities; a new obstacle to performing improvements the existing facilities need, or even an excuse to let them become even worse; completely useless to anyone who doesn't have a car; encouragement to people who do have cars but nevertheless are still prepared to travel by train to drive for longer distances before they get on the train; a way of spending a large amount of money which is chosen in preference to more useful ways to spend it on the grounds that it lends itself better to lots of posters and glossy brochures and grinning idiots in suits getting their photo in the local paper than, for example, upgrading the trackwork or recasting timetabling/routing with greater thoughtfulness and consideration; daft; and then all the reasons most newly built things end up being crap whether they're anything to do with railways or not.


As someone who walks to the station, or takes a bus in extremis (paying a fare), I certainly don't want my ticket price increased to make up for the car park revenue lost, a car park which I will never use.

And indeed it jolly well shouldn't be, for reasons such as:

- The revenue would not be lost. It simply would not be gained. Accountants may be mentally crippled with the ingrained delusion that zero is an arbitrarily large negative number, but there's no reason why normal people should be.
- A station car park isn't for providing revenue. It's for people going by train to leave their cars in.
- There is no need to increase the ticket price to restore total revenue to some arbitrary figure in the absence of some other item in the total. (Indeed if you start down that road you end up getting stuck where you can't do anything because everything's too expensive.)

Station car parks should all be free.

I've yet to work out 'what' it's supposed to do...

Allow grinning idiots from the council to get their photos in the local paper (see above).

I'm pretty sure that XC would prefer to stop in Worcester itself.

I would most definitely prefer that. After all, I don't live in Stoulton. I can walk to Shrub Hill. It doesn't count as serving Worcester if I have to get a train out of Worcester first, and if I'm going to have to change trains in any case it can just as well be done at New Street or Cheltenham/Gloucester, I don't need a new station to do it at.

Trouble is the chance of this sort of thing ever happening is now less than it's ever been, which is one of the main things I have against WOP. The Midland used to do it as a regular thing; shame we haven't still got them.

Whether people in the former situation would actually think to change at Worcestershire Parkway - as opposed to just jumping on the next direct train - is another question.

Or indeed would want to. It annoys me that the Network Rail journey search engine defaults to considering daft numbers of changes acceptable just to save a few minutes, and the "minimise changes" option gives silly answers as often as not (so you have to check all its answers anyway just to see whether they're silly or not). Given the choice between changing trains and a direct but slightly slower service, I will nearly always take the option of remaining comfortably seated in the warm and avoiding hassle in preference to heaving myself out into the cold again and spending n minutes staring at stationary concrete while I wait for a train which might turn out to be rammed. I plan journeys on criteria more complex and numerous than the bald "absolute minimum journey time" the NR site uses, so I don't want the site to "be helpful", nor to "stop being helpful and be unhelpful instead", I just want it to show me everything and let me make my own mind up.

and some of them are only "Parkway" by designation (Didcot, Port Talbot for example). Ironic really that the name Bristol Parkway ( the first, I think) derived its name not from its car park, but the fact that it was at the end ( almost) of the M32 ("The Parkway" - a name which hasn't really stuck - unlike " the Portway". - the A4 heading to Avonmouth)

It's not as inappropriate as all that, really. Bristol Parkway was named after a road; "Parkway" means "Road"; so there you go. Literally, in the case of Bodmin; generally, in that "$location Parkway" and "$location Road" are simply different eras' names for the concept of a station that dumps you out of the train in the middle of bleeding nowhere and leaves you thinking "well wtf am I supposed to do now then?" (to which the answer is "spend 2 hours walking and then have another think").
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,879
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Car parks should not all be free. It is quite right that one should pay to rent a piece of land on which to leave one's property.

Station car parks should be charged (or not) to maximise revenue. With commuting declining, commuters are the classic users who pay without thinking and who will not change modes, and so some should get cheaper or free, but not all. For instance, if you made MKC free for rail users you would notice a big increase in the sale of MKC-Bletchley day return e-tickets, none of which would ever be scanned, because people would park there for other reasons and that would be cheaper than paying and displaying, and genuine users might find it hard to get parked.
 

RPI

Established Member
Joined
6 Dec 2010
Messages
2,757
Car parks should not all be free. It is quite right that one should pay to rent a piece of land on which to leave one's property.

Station car parks should be charged (or not) to maximise revenue. With commuting declining, commuters are the classic users who pay without thinking and who will not change modes, and so some should get cheaper or free, but not all. For instance, if you made MKC free for rail users you would notice a big increase in the sale of MKC-Bletchley day return e-tickets, none of which would ever be scanned, because people would park there for other reasons and that would be cheaper than paying and displaying, and genuine users might find it hard to get parked.
You'd also then see a lot of E Ticket refunds for said tickets!
 

AlbertBeale

Established Member
Joined
16 Jun 2019
Messages
2,752
Location
London
Or indeed would want to. It annoys me that the Network Rail journey search engine defaults to considering daft numbers of changes acceptable just to save a few minutes, and the "minimise changes" option gives silly answers as often as not (so you have to check all its answers anyway just to see whether they're silly or not). Given the choice between changing trains and a direct but slightly slower service, I will nearly always take the option of remaining comfortably seated in the warm and avoiding hassle in preference to heaving myself out into the cold again and spending n minutes staring at stationary concrete while I wait for a train which might turn out to be rammed. I plan journeys on criteria more complex and numerous than the bald "absolute minimum journey time" the NR site uses, so I don't want the site to "be helpful", nor to "stop being helpful and be unhelpful instead", I just want it to show me everything and let me make my own mind up.

Which is the reason I like a "proper" printed timetable when planning a journey, rather than asking a question [and of course it isn't even possible to know the best question to ask without having all the information in front of you first - a vicious circle] of a website which chooses what subset of the information to tell me rather than letting me make my own choice from all the available relevant information.
 

Mordac

Established Member
Joined
5 Mar 2016
Messages
2,309
Location
Birmingham
Or indeed would want to. It annoys me that the Network Rail journey search engine defaults to considering daft numbers of changes acceptable just to save a few minutes, and the "minimise changes" option gives silly answers as often as not (so you have to check all its answers anyway just to see whether they're silly or not). Given the choice between changing trains and a direct but slightly slower service, I will nearly always take the option of remaining comfortably seated in the warm and avoiding hassle in preference to heaving myself out into the cold again and spending n minutes staring at stationary concrete while I wait for a train which might turn out to be rammed. I plan journeys on criteria more complex and numerous than the bald "absolute minimum journey time" the NR site uses, so I don't want the site to "be helpful", nor to "stop being helpful and be unhelpful instead", I just want it to show me everything and let me make my own mind up.
My favourite example of this stupidity (pre-Covid at least, I don't know what the timetables are like now) is travelling from Sheffield to Edinburgh, where the journey planner always send you to change into LNER at Donny rather than taking the direct CrossCountry which is only marginally slower (but, as you say, without the risk of missed connections, dragging baggage around, etc)
 

73128

Member
Joined
8 Dec 2019
Messages
420
Location
Reading
It was more to do with heavy overcrowding on what was clearly a very attractive fast commuter train to Brum - squeezing out the longer distance travellers (or making them stand till seats were released) - for a small share of ORCATS revenue. Train services were pretty much patchy performance wise in any case , not just in the West Midlands.

There was a "clockface" timetable introduced not much later on the Worcester - Leamington via Snow Hill axis in partial compensation.
also because XC want to run everything via Coventry and the airport.
 

geoffk

Established Member
Joined
4 Aug 2010
Messages
3,254
Car parks should not all be free. It is quite right that one should pay to rent a piece of land on which to leave one's property.
I believe station parking is still free in most metropolitan areas. It certainly was in West Yorkshire and Great Manchester when I lived there, with the exception of those in the centre of major towns and cities. Charging would in many areas push the cars on to nearby streets, causing problems for residents.
 

61653 HTAFC

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Dec 2012
Messages
17,673
Location
Another planet...
I believe station parking is still free in most metropolitan areas. It certainly was in West Yorkshire and Great Manchester when I lived there, with the exception of those in the centre of major towns and cities. Charging would in many areas push the cars on to nearby streets, causing problems for residents.
Parking is indeed still free at most minor stations in West Yorkshire. Though in several cases the car parks are so small (Denby Dale, Batley & Mirfield for example) that the revenue generated from charging probably wouldn't cover the cost of implementation or enforcement.
 

The exile

Established Member
Joined
31 Mar 2010
Messages
2,722
Location
Somerset
Not quite sure whether it fulfils the criteria, but how about Meadowbank Stadium? Solidity suggests it was intended for more than just the 86 games, but don’t think it saw much use, and the loadings of the trains I was on during that event weren’t exactly overwhelming!
 

Kettledrum

Member
Joined
13 Nov 2010
Messages
790
re. East Midlands Parkway.......

It's been a disappointment - I think that part of the problem is that it was imposed on a TOC that weren't able to accommodate it very well

If it was being built right now then it could open at the EMR recast where the additional capacity on the new 810s would allow a half hourly "fast" to Sheffield/ Derby and Nottingham and four "fast" to Leicester/ London (plus the Ivanhoe stoppers) - that'd be good enough to attract a lot of people off the M1 and be confident of a short wait for the next service

Instead, the cramped 222s meant that there was only scope for a minimal one "fast" to Sheffield/ Derby and Nottingham and a badly spaced two "fast" to Leicester/ London (plus the Ivanhoe stoppers) - but with horrendous 15/45 splits on the "fast" Leicester/London services

Someone from somewhere like Rotherham/ Mansfield/ Matlock might be attracted to drive to a station where there was a minimum fifteen minute wait for the next London train, but not for a forty five minute wait

So, if it was in the pipeline now then I think there'd be good days ahead - but Stagecoach had to try to take on the complication of the Corby services and trying to squeeze a stop at EM Parkways into the timetable - it was always going to be a struggle (especially given the lack of spare seats on 222s, so limited scope for cheap advanced tickets)

The numbers aren't brilliant but it feels indicative that a station with hundreds of thousands of passengers per annum is regularly brought up as a failure on here whilst a station with a hundred passengers per annum will be defended as providing a vital social service giving unquantifiable public benefits
That's a pretty good summary of why EM Parkway doesn't attract the passenger numbers that it had the potential to.

I used to use it, but it's not very passenger friendly at all: Inconvenient train times, uncompetitive journey times, uncompetitive ticket prices, bleak exposed platforms, high car parking charges, no regular buses or taxi availability...........etc

I never understand why parkway stations have to charge you for parking as it will just encourage people to continue to drive into whichever town/city they were going to.

By all means add a bit more to the train ticket price but make parking free.
exactly, or even make a taxi journey instead.
 
Last edited:

geoffk

Established Member
Joined
4 Aug 2010
Messages
3,254
Parking is indeed still free at most minor stations in West Yorkshire. Though in several cases the car parks are so small (Denby Dale, Batley & Mirfield for example) that the revenue generated from charging probably wouldn't cover the cost of implementation or enforcement.
True, but other car parks were extended during my time there - e.g. Todmorden, Sowerby Bridge and Crossflatts. Hebden Bridge is (or was) always oversubscribed. Mytholmroyd car park was being extended when I moved away.
 

SteveM70

Established Member
Joined
11 Jul 2018
Messages
3,876
True, but other car parks were extended during my time there - e.g. Todmorden, Sowerby Bridge and Crossflatts. Hebden Bridge is (or was) always oversubscribed. Mytholmroyd car park was being extended when I moved away.

The newly-extended car park at Royd reopened last year, and I doubt its ever been more than 20% full since then.
 

Old Yard Dog

Established Member
Joined
21 Aug 2011
Messages
1,483
Ramsline Halt, opened in 1990 at a cost of just £26,000 to serve Derby County's Baseball Ground.

Only four trains ever stopped there before Derby moved to Pride Park in 1997.

Watford Stadium Halt on the Croxley Green Branch opened in 1982 and EMU shuttle trains ran from Watford Junction for bigger games at Vicarage Road. The branch closed to passengers in 1996 but it is not known when the last train stopped.
 
Last edited:

NorthernSpirit

Established Member
Joined
21 Jun 2013
Messages
2,184
Kirkstall Forge was part-funded by the site developers, as the station would be convenient for the huge mixed use development now underway, though very slowly (there will be apartments, homes, a school, surgery and restaurants as well as offices. Allegedly). It's also a small P&R site - I think around 125 parking spots. At worst they could double the parking spots and patronage would rise.
Isn't Kirkstall Forge along with Thorpe Park being built as New Towns? The latter seems so as the "town centre" is more or less built where as the railway station is suppose to be next year, lets see how that fairs once open.
 

YorksLad12

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2020
Messages
1,895
Location
Leeds
Isn't Kirkstall Forge along with Thorpe Park being built as New Towns? The latter seems so as the "town centre" is more or less built where as the railway station is suppose to be next year, lets see how that fairs once open.
They're both firmly within the city of Leeds.
 

D6130

Established Member
Joined
12 Jan 2021
Messages
5,767
Location
West Yorkshire/Tuscany
True, but other car parks were extended during my time there - e.g. Todmorden, Sowerby Bridge and Crossflatts. Hebden Bridge is (or was) always oversubscribed. Mytholmroyd car park was being extended when I moved away.
Hebden Bridge car park has always been oversubscribed because all the trains in both directions stop there....and it's the most affluent town in the valley, with a wide catchment area covering most of the high-end barn conversions with two 4x4s in the surrounding area.
The newly-extended car park at Royd reopened last year, and I doubt its ever been more than 20% full since then.
That's because only 50% of the trains on the line stop there....the slower ones!
 

Bigman

Member
Joined
24 Feb 2011
Messages
297
Location
Leeds
They're both firmly within the city of Leeds.
..which is why Kirkstall Forge surely needs better than a half hourly service. Some of the peak time Ilkley's should call there once the 2 x 3 car 331's get up and running. Car park needs extending too.
 

SteveM70

Established Member
Joined
11 Jul 2018
Messages
3,876
Hebden Bridge car park has always been oversubscribed because all the trains in both directions stop there....and it's the most affluent town in the valley, with a wide catchment area covering most of the high-end barn conversions with two 4x4s in the surrounding area

I presume that’s at least partly tongue in cheek? Hebden and Royd stations are about a mile and a quarter apart so there’s no real difference in the affluence of their catchment areas. For example Mytholmroyd is the closest station for Cragg Vale and all of that valley, plus the Midgley / Booth hillside. And there are a lot of barn conversions up there



That's because only 50% of the trains on the line stop there....the slower ones

Yes, plus Covid / WFH massively reducing passenger numbers. Hebden and Tod car parks used to be full before 7am; now you can generally get a space at any time
 

YorksLad12

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2020
Messages
1,895
Location
Leeds
..which is why Kirkstall Forge surely needs better than a half hourly service. Some of the peak time Ilkley's should call there once the 2 x 3 car 331's get up and running. Car park needs extending too.
That's down to paths and diagrams.

The car parks are, I think, CEG's responsibility as they own the site. When first opened cars parked in the squarish car park on the west of the Leeds-bound platform, but the actual car park was always going to be the long, thin one more to the east. If you think of the station as serving the site rather than as a P&R to take traffic off the A65 it works well. It was never sold/promoted as a straight P&R station which is why it has fewer than half the spaces at Apperley Bridge.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top