JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for CYCLING-AND-SOCIETY Archives


CYCLING-AND-SOCIETY Archives

CYCLING-AND-SOCIETY Archives


CYCLING-AND-SOCIETY@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

CYCLING-AND-SOCIETY Home

CYCLING-AND-SOCIETY Home

CYCLING-AND-SOCIETY  November 2012

CYCLING-AND-SOCIETY November 2012

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: [CTC-RTR] Re: Cycle parking at stations

From:

Dave Holladay <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Sat, 10 Nov 2012 19:17:31 +0000

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (137 lines)

The Barclays Cycle Hire scheme has had little impact on the cycle 
parking use at most London Termini, as it fails to deliver the required 
level of service for regular users - just look at the queuing hire users 
waiting to get bikes off-hire at 17.00 at Waterloo. The big impacts 
which I studied have been the Thameslink Blockade and the 6 month 
closure of the Waterloo & City. I suspect that the revised 'Circle Line' 
at Paddington might have had some impact as well. For Marylebone, 
travelling in on morning commuter services suggests that around 10% of 
these travellers are using a bicycle for part of their commute, by the 
way they are dressed, or cycle related kit carried, or the folding bike 
with them. The poor connectivity of Marylebone with Tube & Bus services, 
drives up the level of cycling and it shows in the fact that around 5% 
of the total onward trips are by bike and 6% of trips to destinations in 
the 1-5Km range. The impact of the blockades was significant pre 2004 
5-6 bikes were parked overnight at St Pancras, by 2011 over 100 bikes 
were parked, and at Waterloo, when the cycle lane opened c.2002 there 
were racks for around 30 bikes at the top in 2012 there are 320 spaces 
there, and these are beginning to be over-subscribed. Well over 1000 
bikes per hour leave Waterloo (from spot counts carried out by CTC staff 
and members waiting for trains) and roughly 40% of the peak hour counts 
are Bromptons, 20% other folders, and 40% bikes presumably from the 
racks on the platforms.

The 2003 survey was an outcome from consultation then being carried out 
by the SRA to formulate a Cycle-Rail Policy (2004) including provision 
for cycle carriage, which then became the DfT Policy - with an amusing 
rebranding of the preface and cover, but leaving SRA oriented references 
through the document. CTC was awarded funding to manage the project and 
used a date collation service to analyse the results. It was in an era 
of change and involved a combination of direct online entry and paper 
which Graham Keen worked tirelessly to enter at CTC offices, as well as 
reviewing the returns to highlight missing locations. In the end we 
covered 2000 of the 2500 UK rail stations within a month with a 
relatively high level of success. Every station graded above C by 
passenger footfall was surveyed and most of the stations down to 
Category D, leaving mainly the unstaffed Category F stations in 
locations so remote and obscure that you could probably park a bike when 
you go home from your summer holiday and collect it next summer - 
without locking it.

A great job from all who participated in a pre-crowd-source bit of 
crowd-sourcing - it is coming up for 10 years since we did this so 2013 
might well be a year to bid for some funding to deliver it, with perhaps 
one of the new members of the Rail Research UK Association, where 
Universities are working with the Rail Safety & Standards Board to 
restore the resources lost when the old BR Technical Centre was thrown 
to the wolves after privatisation.

I would actually hope that a 2013 survey, set-up as an on-line operation 
might seek funding from the maturing cycle parking supply industry, as 
well as support from RSSB, who have funded some of the RRUKA work. It 
could, based on the 2003 version have 2 sweeps - say May and November, 
and encouragement made to have surveys at more than one time per day.

The 2003 survey did have a couple of analyses to determine where funding 
might go to best effect - and identified stations where the number of 
bikes parked, exceeded the formal cycle parking capacity - the record 
being over 1000% for Meols on the Wirral part of the Merseyrail network, 
it also identified stations where more than 100 bikes were parked.

I'd actually propose these analyses for a prospective 2013 survey, with 
a follow-through, of selecting a smaller sample of high volume locations 
(or places with an inexplicably high ratio between daily footfall and 
cycles parked) to have a deeper/interview survey to get a plot of user 
postcodes and other factors shaping the use of cycles to reach the station.

Reply off-list for a more detailed discussion, on this topic.

Dave Holladay.

07 710 535 404


On 10/11/12 17:51, Jim Bush wrote:
> Way back in the Autumn of 2003, the CTC were conducting a survey of cycle parking at railway stations (for DfT ?).  I was between jobs at the time and visited ~125 stations in London and SE England.  Perhaps this survey should be updated now......CTC HQ should be able to find out who funded the 2003 survey(?).
>
> Of course, cycle parking doesn't always have the same demand at the same time.  In John M's example below, it sounds like Dorking station's peak demand for cycling parking is daytime on weekdays.  Back in 2003, the cycle parking was almost empty at London Marylebone station during the day on weekdays, but was nearly full at night and at weekends.  This was because the main cycling traffic at this station was for commuters to arrive on trains at Marylebone in the morning and then use bikes which they had left locked at the stn to complete their journeys to work, in order to avoid the ordeal of the London Underground !  Now that hire bikes (a.k.a. Boris Bikes) are available in Central London, there may be less demand on the cycle parking of private bikes at Marylebone(?), but the doubling of the daily charge for hire bikes (from Ł1 to Ł2 per day) in Jan 2013 may result in increased demand again ?!
>
> Jim Bush, RtR Croydon
>
> --- In [log in to unmask], John Meudell <JohnMCTC@...> wrote:
>> John
>>
>> The total number of stands is not relevant, it’s the number of stands relative to demand that is important.  An example:
>>
>> Absolutely priceless.  Southern initially installed 60 stands at Dorking Mainline, which filled immediately (because they only matched existing demand).  A couple of months later they doubled that to 120, which began filling up until reaching a peak (of 75) in mid 2008, since when…..growth initially fell back and then flattened at around 60 - 65.
>> Since then parking usage has stayed more or less constant.  Yet Southern recently installed another 40 stands, which aren’t used and with little prospect that they will be used (although around 20 of the 160 spaces are taken up by the 10 or so mopeds/motorscooters.)   Most, if not all, cycle parking is commuter traffic, and in this area off-peak travel forms only a small part of the total passenger numbers.)
>>
>> All that is happening is standard market behaviour which determines that uptake will increase until demand saturates, at which point growth stops.  Growth cannot resume until factors within the market change, or in the environment impacting on the market.
>> In this area the principal determinants of cycle usage are economic (it’s cheap!) and health/fitness.  The population in the area currently accessing the station is relatively fixed (and will stay that way) as are the number of commuters.  So there only two sources of growth, one is change in economic status of existing travellers, and the second is improvements in infrastructure to connect three major settlements to the station.  Even that is unlikely to bring cycle parking demand to level that uses up the existing provision (which stands at no more than 50% of the spaces provided.)
>> What we have ended up with is that parking spaces are about double the current demand, with very little scope for growth in the short to medium term.  The additional 40 stands are now what is called a “stranded asset”, or in other words, money has been wasted installing something for which there is no demand, either in the short or medium term.
>> Southern employed a firm of consultants to determine the level of cycle parking provision needed.  They used an overly simplistic analysis that only looked at socio-economic factors, with no actual cycle market data  (basically they just used the same analysis supermarkets might use to estimate the demand for Daz).
>>
>> Despite the outpourings of members of Cycling England, along with the millions spent on research into cycling over the last five years or so, I have seen precious little quality market research done into cycling, and even less market understand develop from such research.  And zero into cycling safety.
>> So knowing how many stations have more than 100 parking spaces is no value at all.  A better approach is to find out how many regular travellers (i.e. season ticket holders) own bikes, work out the proportion who live in easy cycling distance of the station and might use a bike, calculate a contingency margin on top and use that as a basis.
>>
>> Problem is, no-one is interested in working in reality……
>>
>> Cheers
>> John Meudell
>>
>> Sent: 10 November 2012 12:11
>> From: John D Edwards
>> CTC RtR Rep.,  Winchester
>> j.d.edwards@...
>>
>> Dave, what are the actual numbers (approximations will do) of stands at Cambridge and St Albans, please?
>> And, if it won’t take excessive effort, it would be interesting to have a list of all rail stations in UK having more than (say) 100 stands. (Or would “more than 200” be more realistic?)
>>
>> John E
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
>      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CTC-RTR/
>
> <*> Your email settings:
>      Individual Email | Traditional
>
> <*> To change settings online go to:
>      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CTC-RTR/join
>      (Yahoo! ID required)
>
> <*> To change settings via email:
>      [log in to unmask]
>      [log in to unmask]
>
> <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>      [log in to unmask]
>
> <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
>      http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

For help and support help@jisc.ac.uk

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager