please empty your brain below
"g) people who drive cars ought to be using other public transport instead"

I would have thought that a substantial number of users of the car park do use public transport (the tube!) but need a car to get from where public transport doesn't work or exist to where it does. There are many parts of the country, some not far from London, where public transport is simply not an option.

Tim W. | 11.02.22 - 7:34 a.m. | #

I wonder why they don't build the flats on a raft over the car park, is the cost that much higher, and isn't that offset by the retention of the car parking revenue.

Did they expand any car parks to cope with the boom in motoring in the 60s & 70s (come to think of it, did Cockfosters have a car park when it opened).

Still Anon | 11.02.22 - 7:39 a.m. | #

I briefly lived in Brentwood and that station car park is not only used by people using the station but also by the existing flats next to the station as the flats were buit with minimal car parking. (I think it's something like one car parking space per five flats)

Jon Jones | 11.02.22 - 8:13 a.m. | #

I hope there has been some strategic analysis of potential revenue capture (and improved environmental sustainability) by TfL through targeted bus&ride/park&ride provision at some key stations. But I suspect a more dogmatic attitude

TfL would need to handle Newbury Park carefully as it is the usual bustitution destination when there are works on the southern parts of the GEML, unless that is swapped to a crossrail station

MilesT | 11.02.22 - 8:15 a.m. | #

Electric vehicles still need somewhere to park and access to public charging points will become an increasingly urgent issue. I'm glad I don't have to make these kinds of decisions.

Waterhouse | 11.02.22 - 8:41 a.m. | #

TfL also like building on station car parks as they primarily benefit non London residents who drive as close as they can to central London with a station car park.

And, TfL also have the Mayors Transprt Stratefy which puts a strong emphasis on reducing car usage and car parking in new developments. So building on car parks is a win-win, especially if the buildings have a development model with ongoing rental money going to TfL coffers.

David | 11.02.22 - 8:49 a.m. | #

The issues of people driving across county borders is not constrained to London.

I live near the border of Greater Manchester and Derbyshire, living in the former. At our town's main station we have two large, free car parks. On a weekday they are almost always full.

Some of the patrons of them are people driving to the station from the local area. There's limited local bus services to many places round here so inevitably people drive.

But a good chunk of the car park are people coming from the next station over the border from Derbyshire. The next station has some parking but not that much. But importantly a return ticket to Manchester from that Derbyshire station is £11.20. From my town in the Greater Manchester borders, it's £7.20. You can save £4 a day by driving into Greater Manchester and parking for free.

Much could be resolved by charging for parking (I believe they tried that once - just meant everyone parked on the street), improving public transport, or simply making the fares farer... None of these seems likely.

Andrew Bowden | Homepage | 11.02.22 - 9:52 a.m. | #

Harrow-on-the-Hill is absolutely swamped with empty office buildings. There was a wave of development pre-pandemic with most of them empty, and I imagine still empty since WFH came into reality. Developing its car park into flats - thinking about what do to with all those empty office blocks first might be a better idea, and same with many of these other areas.

Jayne | 11.02.22 - 9:57 a.m. | #

On a few occasions (for SE sections of the London Loop for example) it has been easier for us to drive our electric car from one side of London to the other, charge (when we only had the 32Kw battery - not needed with the bigger one) in the station car park and then use public transport for either the start/end of the walk.

Cornish Cockney | 11.02.22 - 9:59 a.m. | #

Morden is also a major commuter parking station with a total of 547 spaces in the adjoining car parks, although of these only 71 or 72 are TfL/NCP operated.

Peter | 11.02.22 - 10:17 a.m. | #

Agreed Tim W. Indeed, if you were to call these car parks on the outskirts of London "park and ride" schemes, then they sound rather different don't they? Something lots of towns and cities have brought in to DISCOURAGE people driving into the centre, i.e. to reduce car use. Especially as the bus services on the borders of London aren't great, and indeed getting worse (e.g. the 84 route stopping).

Another issue is that the generic tall blocks TfL want to put up are massively out of scale with the local buildings. The Finchley Central scheme was rejected because of this.

dg writes: One of the local buildings, immediately adjacent, is a 9-storey office block.

Mikey C | 11.02.22 - 10:46 a.m. | #

My "cousin-in-law" and her partner are looking to buy a flat, but as they both drive to work are specifically looking for locations with poor public transport connection. Its the only way they can come close to affordability, and a real shame too.

Geo_rich | 11.02.22 - 11:32 a.m. | #

Travelling from a remote tube terminus to central London is quite time-inefficient. 30 minutes Cockfosters to Kings Cross, as against 17 minutes Potters Bar to Kings Cross.
I think the raft idea deserves attention, though

Malcolm of Kent | 11.02.22 - 11:47 a.m. | #

FYI north ealing was also looked at for development, i am not sure if it's still on the slate but it makes a lot of sense.

Regarding rafts (or more accurately podium decks) the amount of space taken up by stair cores, bin stores, substations etc that have to be on the ground floor mean you'll get much less than 1/3 of your existing spaces back. plus the height of buildings is always sensitive to so effectively raising them a storey is not on. add in the complexity of ownership, fire safety (you'll need sprinklers) and ventilation and it's not really worth it for developers. A parking space might be £30 a week, but a studio flat is £300.

the other tfl calculation is that 350 cars take 350 people. but 350 flats house closer to 1000 people. and since they have nowhere to park they will be using the tube.

Alistair Twin | 11.02.22 - 1:26 p.m. | #

At Walthamstow Central they’ve managed to build a lot of flats but at the same time keep a lot of parking spaces (it still ranks highly in the list).

Dan | 12.02.22 - 8:19 a.m. | #

>>and the other 60% as unaffordable as everywhere else is.

Given the large number of developments in London, it remains a mystery to me to whom all of these (and all the other housing development) flats get sold to. Or perhaps they remain empty as money laundering schemes for Russian oligarchs.

Agent X | 12.02.22 - 8:39 a.m. | #

Underground car parking is massively expensive, which would drive up the costs. They don’t build car parking on the ground floor because that would mean cutting of a floor of housing and have a whole heap of engineering consequences. Most councils are fighting to keep developments low rise

Apart from finances it’s also as a policy decision - There’s no intention to make driving in London easier. Especially next to transport hubs.

Theo | 12.02.22 - 9:37 a.m. | #

the walthamstow central is a good example of why not to keep the car parking, as those flats are effectively in the middle of a car park, which must be fairly unpleasant to walk through and look out on. Also I dont think i've even seen it remotely full. I think if those flats were planned now they would drastically reduce the parking.

regarding the canard about "oligarcs" buying all the flats, these are all for rent for a start, and the flats in zones 3+ are generally being sold to poeple who live in them, they are not sitting empty, whether one considers them overpriced or nice or whatever is neither here or there.

Alistair Twin | 12.02.22 - 10:54 a.m. | #

Cockfosters is a key 'park and ride' facility, for those looking to travel into town. Doubly so when Arsenal are playing, and whilst Thameslink/Great Northern continue to have shoddy services, with regular cancellations. Call this a park and ride facility and all of a sudden it falls inside a transport plan to stop people driving further into London.

I really hope this gets taken to appeal.

Jordan D | 12.02.22 - 1:16 p.m. | #

Makes perfect sense to me. Lots of politicians have made a song and dance how TfL should be 'making money from their assets' and copying profitable agencies like MTR in Hong Kong.

Hopefully in a positive future we'll get additional public transport combined with development, rather than just the new development...

James Scantlebury | 12.02.22 - 3:20 p.m. | #

"it remains a mystery to me to whom all of these (and all the other housing development) flats get sold to"

Buy to let landlords, who are very happy to charge nice high rent prices to pay their mortgage on their 11th property. (yes, just a little bitter)

James Scantlebury | 12.02.22 - 3:22 p.m. | #

The flats at Cockfosters won't get sold to anyone, they are all for rent.

tops | 13.02.22 - 11:22 a.m. | #

Not satisfied with building on their car parks, TfL are so strapped for cash that they've applied for and been given the go ahead to build a huge residential development of over 850 homes in nine blocks, the tallest at 25 stories, running for half a mile along the Piccadilly/District Line railway embankment in South Acton. Watch out for similar activity on a grassy embankment or railway cutting near you!

ActonMan | 13.02.22 - 7:56 p.m. | #

Those numbers (of existing parking spaces) are fascinating and crazy.. the fact that there aren't more park and ride type schemes in London is a disgrace. Eg hop off the A12 or M11 via a dedicated car park onto the central line

Thom Chesshyre | 15.02.22 - 7:22 a.m. | #

Pre Covid the Epping branch of the Central line was standing only before Leytonstone, and 'full' by Mile End. There wasn't any space for additional passengers from park and rides.

James | 22.02.22 - 2:30 p.m. | #

But you can only build on car parks once, and who's to decide when that should be?

Turns out it's the Transport Minister.

Grant Shapps has just overruled TfL and Enfield, for fear of losing car parking spaces, and rejected their planning application.

diamond geezer | Homepage | 11.03.22 - 2:08 p.m. | #

This is just the Tories stopping TfL from gaining revenue. They absolutely detest TfL, and London.

They'd rather support car drivers from outside that borough.

I hope TfL double the car park prices, then use the reduced usage to support 'the car park isn't required'.

Sykobee | 12.03.22 - 10:40 a.m. | #











TridentScan v2.10.0 | Privacy Policy