|
Post by melikepie on Mar 11, 2022 23:18:54 GMT
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Mar 12, 2022 2:40:09 GMT
As Saddam Hussein said in South Park "Iran, Iraq, who cares?"
|
|
|
Post by alpinejohn on Mar 12, 2022 8:21:52 GMT
Whilst this application has been rejected, it seems highly likely amended plans will be swiftly appear with slightly fewer parking spaces being lost which sure enough Shapps can then approve.
This appears to be yet another example of a very typical developers tactic. Always prepare two plans. You first post up plans for some outrageous mega development which you know will never be accepted and indeed you never intend to build. In the meantime you already have the real plans drawn up and ready to issue as soon as your initial application is rejected.
In a few months time look out for the usual soundbites .. "we have listened carefully to local concerns ... our revised plan is far smaller ... safeguards more car parking spaces... better for the environment... ". (oh and our pockets)
Guess what, people forget that all those displaced commuters - do not dissapear they will quickly clog up local roads with parked cars instead, until that triggers yet another outbreak of yellow lines and controlled parking zones. Removing a heavily used car park does not solve parking issues it displaces it.
Perversely over in Europe pretty much the exact opposite is happening - with park and ride facilities being discretely created and expanded at many outlying railway stations and feeder bus routes around Geneva which has resulted in a huge leap in ridership, less congested roads, and indeed less pollution in the city.
|
|
hobbayne
RIP John Lennon and George Harrison
Posts: 516
|
Post by hobbayne on Mar 12, 2022 9:57:16 GMT
Will the train crew accommodation be saved? I believe it was to be demolished as well.
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Mar 12, 2022 10:55:52 GMT
How many of the non-London people who drive to this station only do so because the fares are cheaper than any alternative railway service?
Its the same type of scenario as people who live in Croydon avoiding local railway services and taking the tram to Wimbledon and then travelling on the District line - to reduce total travel costs! (in this case by only paying zone 1-3 train fares instead of 1-5 or 6)
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,359
|
Post by Chris M on Mar 12, 2022 12:07:31 GMT
How many of the non-London people who drive to this station only do so because the fares are cheaper than any alternative railway service? If that's the case, then you fix the problem by removing the fare disparity not by removing car parking.
|
|
|
Post by nig on Mar 12, 2022 16:36:31 GMT
Will the train crew accommodation be saved? I believe it was to be demolished as well. Yes going to be demolished and rebuilt in the ground floor of one of the block of flats well that was the plan
|
|
|
Post by nig on Mar 12, 2022 16:37:58 GMT
Whilst this application has been rejected, it seems highly likely amended plans will be swiftly appear with slightly fewer parking spaces being lost which sure enough Shapps can then approve. This appears to be yet another example of a very typical developers tactic. Always prepare two plans. You first post up plans for some outrageous mega development which you know will never be accepted and indeed you never intend to build. In the meantime you already have the real plans drawn up and ready to issue as soon as your initial application is rejected. In a few months time look out for the usual soundbites .. "we have listened carefully to local concerns ... our revised plan is far smaller ... safeguards more car parking spaces... better for the environment... ". (oh and our pockets) Guess what, people forget that all those displaced commuters - do not dissapear they will quickly clog up local roads with parked cars instead, until that triggers yet another outbreak of yellow lines and controlled parking zones. Removing a heavily used car park does not solve parking issues it displaces it. Perversely over in Europe pretty much the exact opposite is happening - with park and ride facilities being discretely created and expanded at many outlying railway stations and feeder bus routes around Geneva which has resulted in a huge leap in ridership, less congested roads, and indeed less pollution in the city. This is already the second application with more parking places
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Mar 13, 2022 0:37:52 GMT
How many of the non-London people who drive to this station only do so because the fares are cheaper than any alternative railway service? If that's the case, then you fix the problem by removing the fare disparity not by removing car parking. Yes well in theory it is easy and very worthwhile. But in reality the question has to be how?- an inflation busting push of TfL Railways fares up to match those of the mainline railways? (this would likely delight TfL's accountants / bean counters!)
- find cash to subsidise mainline fares so that they can be reduced to the same level as TfL Railway fares? (this will annoy everyone who does not benefit)
- some other solution? (long term fares adjustments - eg: over a decade - will still likely involve one of the other options detailed above).
Apologies but I only understand the problem, I do not have a solution that will be both affordable and not financially hurt some passengers. As I understand it, the railway services* which eventually became the Underground Electric Railways always charged lower fares than the surface steam railways. So this is an age old issue.
*Carefully worded because I suspect that the Metropolitan Railway charged mainline railway fare scales but the fares were reduced when the Met was swallowed up into the LPTB in the early 1930s. I might be wrong here.
Also, how could the issue of people from Croydon travelling by tram to Wimbledon to save money be resolved? Especially as tram fares are like bus fares - single charge, no matter the distance, without cards being read when alighting - I suppose that switching to distance-based graduated fares would be possible, especially on the Wimbledon branch, but after several decades of flat fares it would be horribly messy and unpopular to implement.
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Mar 13, 2022 8:37:42 GMT
Removing car parking space discourages people driving to the station which has two benefits for TfL. It reduces congestion in the vicinity which improves bus journey times and encourages people to use the buses creating extra fares revenue. Add the additional revenue from rents and building on Tube station car parks is an all round winner for TfL.
As for those non-London people driving in from outside they don't vote in May 2024 and they don't pay Ealing/Enfield/whatever council tax so not really TfL's problem.
And with the price of fuel going through the roof it might soon become cheaper to take National Rail services from their nearest station than to drive into London
|
|
|
Post by 35b on Mar 13, 2022 20:50:17 GMT
Removing car parking space discourages people driving to the station which has two benefits for TfL. It reduces congestion in the vicinity which improves bus journey times and encourages people to use the buses creating extra fares revenue. Add the additional revenue from rents and building on Tube station car parks is an all round winner for TfL. As for those non-London people driving in from outside they don't vote in May 2024 and they don't pay Ealing/Enfield/whatever council tax so not really TfL's problem. And with the price of fuel going through the roof it might soon become cheaper to take National Rail services from their nearest station than to drive into London You forget the release of capacity at the outer end of the line to support demand further in.
|
|
|
Post by jamdougnut on Mar 16, 2022 18:15:17 GMT
(This is a bit off topic) But speaking of flats on car parks, plans have been submitted to build flats on Hounslow West's carpark: hounslowweststation.co.uk
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Mar 28, 2022 3:01:46 GMT
|
|