Cycle lockers & SW Trains

Hi Elyob,

elyob said:

Anyone with any local views, as I've done all this research without having
ever been to Winchfield station.

I have local views, but you might want to mail me for them (address
above works and I check it regularly).

Mike

elyob wrote:
Well, that's my impression

Quoted message said:

from here (http://www3.hants.gov.uk/railleaflet04.pdf), and SW Trains
confirmed this.

Very out of date leaflet - many more stations have lockers than
indicated there. Re the issue of charging and monitoring use - I'll
investigate.

Personally, I'm in favour of charging for the lockers (assuming copious
free sheffield stands are available as an alternative). Once the rail
companies understand that cyclists are willing and able to cough up,
there'll be a much greater willingness to provide decent parking.

£5 a week sounds reasonable for A1 Gold Standard parking. The
landowner would be getting better returns from bike lockers than for
car parking.

"Mike Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Hi Elyob,

elyob said:

Anyone with any local views, as I've done all this research without
having ever been to Winchfield station.

I have local views, but you might want to mail me for them (address above
works and I check it regularly).

emailed ..

"Not Responding" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Very out of date leaflet - many more stations have lockers than
indicated there. Re the issue of charging and monitoring use - I'll
investigate.

You think that's out of date, SWT originally denied any being at the
station! Any info, do let me know! Thanks.

Quoted message said:

Personally, I'm in favour of charging for the lockers (assuming copious
free sheffield stands are available as an alternative). Once the rail
companies understand that cyclists are willing and able to cough up,
there'll be a much greater willingness to provide decent parking.

Quoted message said:

£5 a week sounds reasonable for A1 Gold Standard parking. The
landowner would be getting better returns from bike lockers than for
car parking.

I think a charge scenario is better that just a deposit as it'll free any
up, even if it's just for two weeks whilst someone goes on holiday.
Unfortunately, some people down there would have no problem putting down a
hefty deposit, as they know they'll get it back. However, I would also say
that some of the people down there have deep enough pockets that they
wouldn't blink at £20/month. At £5 a week, I would do it, but only with some
assurances. Well, I guess the A1 Gold would be my assurance. But you're
right, it then becomes a money spinner, therefore they may be willing to
invest more. Which would be nice. 🙂

Not Responding said:

Personally, I'm in favour of charging for the lockers (assuming copious
free sheffield stands are available as an alternative). Once the rail
companies understand that cyclists are willing and able to cough up,
there'll be a much greater willingness to provide decent parking.

£5 a week sounds reasonable...

I thought the lockers had to be 'free' due to Hampshire County Council
'principles' in support of riding to stations.
ISTR it is they who set the rules, not SWT <spit>
I think the lockers are more HCC than SWT.

tt

triddletree said:

Not Responding said:

Personally, I'm in favour of charging for the lockers (assuming copious
free sheffield stands are available as an alternative). Once the rail
companies understand that cyclists are willing and able to cough up,
there'll be a much greater willingness to provide decent parking.

£5 a week sounds reasonable...

I thought the lockers had to be 'free' due to Hampshire County Council
'principles' in support of riding to stations.
ISTR it is they who set the rules, not SWT <spit>
I think the lockers are more HCC than SWT.

Indeed, the chief exec of SWT is a notorious cyclist hater. This is
due, in part, to the ferocious campaigning by cyclists that he has had
to deal with.

SWT continue to demand more car parking at rail stations in Hants. They
are fully aware of the huge, unmet demand. HCC and the local
authorities are, in principle against this - car parks create traffic
which causes congestion, pollution etc. While better car parking
provision may, to some extent, reduce overall car-miles you certainly
don't want to encourage people to drive into towns. Parkway stations
are different and Southampton Airport is a good example where car
parking /is/ being allowed to increase.

My view is that SWT have not really understood the economics of rail
travel and parking provision. Bear in mind that to recover the costs of
owning town centre development land, you need to charge at least a
pound an hour per car. Few stations charge this much and are,
therefore, subsidising drivers.

But to really maximise revenue, they need to get more bums on seats and
when you can get 8 bikes parked on the same space as one car, the
economics become obvious.

The real shift will come when the rail companies realise that cyclists
are willing and able to pay their way.

"Not Responding" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Indeed, the chief exec of SWT is a notorious cyclist hater. This is
due, in part, to the ferocious campaigning by cyclists that he has had
to deal with.

He wouldn't have to put up with the campaigning if he just gave us
what we want. 🙂 Seriously, check-out the 'National no-bike-day'
thread and see what you think. I know rail station car parking is
expensive, but for one day it could be worth it just to show what
a problem the country would have without us.

--
Dave Lloyd
So open minded, my brains dribbled out.

david lloyd wrote on 16/09/2006 13:35 +0100:

Quoted message said:

He wouldn't have to put up with the campaigning if he just gave us
what we want. 🙂 Seriously, check-out the 'National no-bike-day'
thread and see what you think. I know rail station car parking is
expensive, but for one day it could be worth it just to show what
a problem the country would have without us.

You'd have to get up early to get to the spaces before the regulars.
But for just one day it would be worth it!

--
Tony

"Anyone who conducts an argument by appealing to authority is not using
his intelligence; he is just using his memory."
- Leonardo da Vinci

david lloyd said:

"Not Responding" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Indeed, the chief exec of SWT is a notorious cyclist hater. This is
due, in part, to the ferocious campaigning by cyclists that he has had
to deal with.

He wouldn't have to put up with the campaigning if he just gave us
what we want. 🙂 Seriously, check-out the 'National no-bike-day'
thread and see what you think. I know rail station car parking is
expensive, but for one day it could be worth it just to show what
a problem the country would have without us.

Rail car parking is cheap as chips. Try buying some town centre
development land, surfacing it, lighting it, cleaning it, insuring it,
maintaining it etc etc etc and if you want to break even, you'll be
charging more than the railways do.

"triddletree" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Not Responding said:

Personally, I'm in favour of charging for the lockers (assuming copious
free sheffield stands are available as an alternative). Once the rail
companies understand that cyclists are willing and able to cough up,
there'll be a much greater willingness to provide decent parking.

£5 a week sounds reasonable...

I thought the lockers had to be 'free' due to Hampshire County Council
'principles' in support of riding to stations.
ISTR it is they who set the rules, not SWT <spit>
I think the lockers are more HCC than SWT.

Well, both sides have equally denied having anything to do with them! I've
got one more number to call on Tuesday.

"Not Responding" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

david lloyd said:

"Not Responding" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Indeed, the chief exec of SWT is a notorious cyclist hater. This is
due, in part, to the ferocious campaigning by cyclists that he has had
to deal with.

He wouldn't have to put up with the campaigning if he just gave us
what we want. 🙂 Seriously, check-out the 'National no-bike-day'
thread and see what you think. I know rail station car parking is
expensive, but for one day it could be worth it just to show what
a problem the country would have without us.

Rail car parking is cheap as chips. Try buying some town centre
development land, surfacing it, lighting it, cleaning it, insuring it,
maintaining it etc etc etc and if you want to break even, you'll be
charging more than the railways do.

I suppose I meant expensive compared to what you have to pay for when
cycling.
Yes the parking is cheap when you think of what they could get for the land,
but
then their profits for running a rail service would be hit, as nobody would
be able
to park. Right now the vast majority of rail users who park do not have the
ability,
either mentally or physically, to get to the station in any other way.

Think out of town parking and a bus to the station, arriving in time for the
trains.
The parking can then be upped to a true cost value, thus subsidising the bus
and disuading people from driving right to the station. Perhaps then they
could
develope the land and have the rents subsidising the bus.

--
Dave Lloyd
So open minded, my brains dribbled out.

david lloyd said:

"Not Responding" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Rail car parking is cheap as chips. Try buying some town centre
development land, surfacing it, lighting it, cleaning it, insuring it,
maintaining it etc etc etc and if you want to break even, you'll be
charging more than the railways do.

I suppose I meant expensive compared to what you have to pay for when
cycling.
Yes the parking is cheap when you think of what they could get for the land,
but
then their profits for running a rail service would be hit, as nobody would
be able
to park. Right now the vast majority of rail users who park do not have the
ability,
either mentally or physically, to get to the station in any other way.

That's certainly the current thinking of SWT. GNER are taking a
different view and have increased car parking prices massively this
year. GNER's strategy is to realise that their core business is the
provision of good value rail services.

The figures tend to support GNER. Take any rail station and on the
network rail site, you can find the daily throughput of passengers.
Compare this with the number of car parking spaces. In the case of
Fareham, nearly 3000 people per day pass through the station yet there
are only 100 or so car parking spaces. This tells me that the vast
majority rail users /do/ have the ability, both mentally and
physically, to get to the station by means other than the car. The
packed bike stands would appear to confirm this.

Quoted message said:

Think out of town parking and a bus to the station, arriving in time for the
trains.
The parking can then be upped to a true cost value, thus subsidising the bus
and disuading people from driving right to the station. Perhaps then they
could
develope the land and have the rents subsidising the bus.

On 16 Sep 2006 04:35 Not Responding said:

SWT continue to demand more car parking at rail stations
in Hants.

Despite having very high levels of overcrowding on commuter trains.

Quoted message said:

They are fully aware of the huge, unmet demand. HCC
and the local authorities are, in principle against this - car
parks create traffic which causes congestion, pollution etc.
While better car parking provision may, to some extent, reduce
overall car-miles you certainly don't want to encourage people
to drive into towns. Parkway stations are different and
Southampton Airport is a good example where car parking
/is/ being allowed to increase.

Ah. Southampton Airport Parkway. Where one can see the commuters
parking their cars some distance away in the layby south of the M27
junction
<http://www.streetmap.co.uk/streetmap.dll?G2M?X=444145&Y=116645> -
because the 594 car parking spaces cost 6.90 GBP per weekday
<http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/stations/SOA.html> and are usually all
occupied by commuters.

And where the undercover bike stands are often unavailable for use by
bikes (or almost so) because they are full of motorbikes and
motorscooters. I'm not sure if these Sheffield stands covered by
corrugated iron constitute "cycle storage" - if not, then allegedly
there are bike lockers somewhere, I've just never noticed them.

Quoted message said:

My view is that SWT have not really understood the economics
of rail travel and parking provision. Bear in mind that to recover
the costs of owning town centre development land, you need to
charge at least a pound an hour per car. Few stations charge this
much and are, therefore, subsidising drivers.

Compared to the Parkway charges, Southampton Central charges only 5.50
GBP/day (although it is every day, not just weekdays), with
Parkway-matching 6.90 reserved for "premium" spaces. So not only is
Southampton Central a better place to catch the train if you want a
seat up to London, it's also cheaper to park your car.
<http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/stations/SOU.html> - again, "cycle
storage" facilities are claimed.

Quoted message said:

But to really maximise revenue, they need to get more bums
on seats and when you can get 8 bikes parked on the same
space as one car, the economics become obvious.

Except that ISTM SWT's Southampton carparks are usually occupied
almost exclusively by commuters, and SWT has got all the commuting
bums on seats and not on seats it can cope with anyway. Weekday
parking to use a train outside commuting times is, to a first
approximation, unavailable - and I've often had difficulty finding
somewhere to park the bike at Parkway, while Central isn't much
better.

Quoted message said:

The real shift will come when the rail companies realise
that cyclists are willing and able to pay their way.

Indeed. The reaction I've had from SWT tends to be of the "you're the
sixth person today I've told that there's no demand for that service"
style.

--
Tim Forcer [email hidden]
The University of Southampton, UK

The University is not responsible for my opinions

Tim Forcer wrote on 18/09/2006 09:11 +0100:

Quoted message said:

Ah. Southampton Airport Parkway. Where one can see the commuters
parking their cars some distance away in the layby south of the M27
junction
<http://www.streetmap.co.uk/streetmap.dll?G2M?X=444145&Y=116645> -
because the 594 car parking spaces cost 6.90 GBP per weekday
<http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/stations/SOA.html> and are usually all
occupied by commuters.

I think the latter is the real reason. You have to be there before
about 07:30 or all the 594 plus a few creative spaces have gone for the day.

--
Tony

"Anyone who conducts an argument by appealing to authority is not using
his intelligence; he is just using his memory."
- Leonardo da Vinci

Tim Forcer said:

On 16 Sep 2006 04:35 Not Responding said:

Ah. Southampton Airport Parkway. Where one can see the commuters
parking their cars some distance away in the layby south of the M27
junction
<http://www.streetmap.co.uk/streetmap.dll?G2M?X=444145&Y=116645> -
because the 594 car parking spaces cost 6.90 GBP per weekday
<http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/stations/SOA.html> and are usually all
occupied by commuters.

The overflow parking happens because there is massive demand for
6.90GBP all day car parking.

Quoted message said:

And where the undercover bike stands are often unavailable for use by
bikes (or almost so) because they are full of motorbikes and
motorscooters. I'm not sure if these Sheffield stands covered by
corrugated iron constitute "cycle storage" - if not, then allegedly
there are bike lockers somewhere, I've just never noticed them.

I think there are about three lockers on the platform.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

My view is that SWT have not really understood the economics
of rail travel and parking provision. Bear in mind that to recover
the costs of owning town centre development land, you need to
charge at least a pound an hour per car. Few stations charge this
much and are, therefore, subsidising drivers.

Compared to the Parkway charges, Southampton Central charges only 5.50
GBP/day (although it is every day, not just weekdays), with
Parkway-matching 6.90 reserved for "premium" spaces. So not only is
Southampton Central a better place to catch the train if you want a
seat up to London, it's also cheaper to park your car.
<http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/stations/SOU.html> - again, "cycle
storage" facilities are claimed.

Quoted message said:

But to really maximise revenue, they need to get more bums
on seats and when you can get 8 bikes parked on the same
space as one car, the economics become obvious.

Except that ISTM SWT's Southampton carparks are usually occupied
almost exclusively by commuters, and SWT has got all the commuting
bums on seats and not on seats it can cope with anyway.

Which makes it all the more pointless for SWT to subsidise car drivers.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The real shift will come when the rail companies realise
that cyclists are willing and able to pay their way.

Indeed. The reaction I've had from SWT tends to be of the "you're the
sixth person today I've told that there's no demand for that service"
style.

Parkway is going to be expanded and developed - I forget the timings,
some of it may be tied in with the (proposed) airport expansion. Keep
an eye on HCC/EBC website for opportunities to lobby for more bike
parking.

On 18 Sep 2006 01:35 Not Responding said:

Tim Forcer wrote:

[cut]

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The real shift will come when the rail companies realise
that cyclists are willing and able to pay their way.

Indeed. The reaction I've had from SWT tends to be of the
"you're the sixth person today I've told that there's no
demand for that service" style.

Parkway is going to be expanded and developed - I forget the
timings, some of it may be tied in with the (proposed) airport
expansion. Keep an eye on HCC/EBC website for opportunities
to lobby for more bike parking.

OK. I've asked to be notified when any relevant consultations appear
on
<http://consultations.hants.gov.uk/>. Being a Southampton resident
the (official) info provided by the Council about the airport and
related matters tends to be, errm, selective.

Some delving around on hantsweb yields some nuggets, including:

"The station car park at Southampton Airport Parkway is at capacity
and the operator has already submitted plans for a major expansion."

200k GBP allocated for "Southampton Airport Parkway cycle links"
(Presumably to Chandlers Ford?)

The M27 junction traffic is projected to rise BY 160% over 20 years.
[This should make getting around the roundabout by bike easier, as the
motor traffic will be near-stationary for much of the day!]

--
Tim Forcer [email hidden]
The University of Southampton, UK

The University is not responsible for my opinions

"Not Responding" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

triddletree said:

Not Responding said:

[..]

My view is that SWT have not really understood the economics of rail
travel and parking provision. Bear in mind that to recover the costs of
owning town centre development land, you need to charge at least a
pound an hour per car. Few stations charge this much and are,
therefore, subsidising drivers.

But to really maximise revenue, they need to get more bums on seats and
when you can get 8 bikes parked on the same space as one car, the
economics become obvious.

The real shift will come when the rail companies realise that cyclists
are willing and able to pay their way.

So would there be any benefit in running a rail service with coaches capable
of taking several cycles and their riders? after all, the cyclist often
needs transport at *both* ends of his rail journey .

ian henden said:

<snip>

Quoted message said:

So would there be any benefit in running a rail service with coaches capable
of taking several cycles and their riders? after all, the cyclist often
needs transport at *both* ends of his rail journey .

As a cyclist, I like the idea! Bikes on trains only works when a small
percentage of passengers want to take bikes - the model doesn't scale
well.

The major problem is simply economics. A bike and rider takes the space
of 3 people but only pays for one. I don't think the market would bear
paying 3 times the fare and I if the riders aren't paying for their
service then the level of all fares goes up. Not popular and not
likely.

Of course, there are also secondary problems such as loading/unloading
times. An old lady on a bus with a week's shopping can screw up bus
timings and that's nothing compared to a carriage full of cyclists.

Finally, there's the simple matter of capacity.

"Not Responding" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

ian henden said:

<snip>

Quoted message said:

So would there be any benefit in running a rail service with coaches
capable
of taking several cycles and their riders? after all, the cyclist often
needs transport at *both* ends of his rail journey .

As a cyclist, I like the idea! Bikes on trains only works when a small
percentage of passengers want to take bikes - the model doesn't scale
well.

The major problem is simply economics. A bike and rider takes the space
of 3 people but only pays for one. I don't think the market would bear
paying 3 times the fare and I if the riders aren't paying for their
service then the level of all fares goes up. Not popular and not
likely.

Of course, there are also secondary problems such as loading/unloading
times. An old lady on a bus with a week's shopping can screw up bus
timings and that's nothing compared to a carriage full of cyclists.

Finally, there's the simple matter of capacity.

From my own point of view, bikes on trains are bloody annoying in rush hour
when "going with the flow". If everyone was getting off at the same stop,
then it wouldn't be as bad, but there's too much mucking about. I just
picked up a bike for £30 which I will leave at my target station. Looking at
Waterloo's cycle storage, it's a complete bloody nightmare! I cannot see how
someone can get their bike out of the middle of 'the crush'.

Going into London has been good for the folding bike market and good luck to
it. I just get annoyed that there is no special provision for going out of
London in the morning. One or two bikes booked infrequently won't destroy
their business, and it's the only way to get started on a holiday.