At last - Worcestershire Parkway part of £53m cash injection for county

At last - Worcestershire Parkway part of £53m cash injection for county

The land where Worcestershire Parkway will sit, in Norton

Peter Pawsey, chairman of Worcestershire's LEP

Flooding investment is on the way to New Road

Worcester Technology Park is one of the fund's big winners

The A4440 Carrington Bridge: £63m dualling not on the cards yet

First published in News
Last updated
Malvern Gazette: Tom Edwards by , Political Reporter

THE long-awaited dream of a new Worcestershire railway station is finally going to happen - as part of a £53 million Government and European cash injection to kick-start the economy.

Your Worcester News can reveal how yesterday's announcement - which will create 3,000 jobs - includes £7.5 million of Government funds to build Worcestershire Parkway on land at Norton near Worcester.

Worcestershire County Council's leadership says the award "will now make parkway happen", and has revealed officers are well underway with work on a planning application for the station which will be submitted in the first half of next year.

As part of the Government's award for Worcestershire, known as the Growth Fund, £13 million is being handed over in April 2015 and another £34 million will then be drip fed across during the following four years.

That takes the Growth Fund tally to £47 million, and Worcestershire’s Local Enterprise Partnership is adding £6 million of European cash to the pot to create a £53 million kitty for eight key projects.

The £7.5 million for Worcestershire Parkway will arrive in mid-2016, by which time the council hopes to have secured planning permission and taken ownership of the land needed to build it.

It is expected to include a 500-space car park, and the rest of the £10 million needed to fully fund the £17.1 million station will then come from a long-term loan paid for from parking charges.

As well as the Government's funding commitment the Department for Transport has agreed to support talks with train operators to ensure they use the two platforms at Norton.

They will serve current Cotswold Line services, heading to Oxford and London, of which talks are already advanced with the train industry, and cross-country services linking to destinations like Bristol and Cardiff.

The Department for Transport has also agreed to re-examine the "business case" for faster rail services to London.

Norton Parkway has been talked about for 30 years but the funding deal means it is now finally within sight.

The county council says it is aiming to get it into operation during the 2016/17 financial year, and has vowed to make it as big a success as Warwick Parkway.

Councillor Simon Geraghty, deputy leader and the cabinet member for economy, skills and infrastructure, said: "For decades people have talked about this - my message is that this is now finally going to happen.

"It's effectively got the green light from the Government and that means rather than talk about, we can now get on and deliver.

"The announcement and the money means we can crack on and make this a reality - it's a great day for Worcestershire and shows all the work on this has finally paid off."

GROWTH FUND WILL CREATE 3,000 JOBS IN THE COUNTY

AROUND 3,000 jobs are being created by Worcestershire's £53 million funding boost, it emerged yesterday.

In return for handing the money over the Government wants the county's Local Enterprise Partnership to oversee the specific jobs creation tally, as well as 1,000 new homes, by 2021.

As reaction from around the county flooded in yesterday more details emerged around some of the major projects which have secured funding.

It includes £4 million for another expansion of Malvern Hills Science Park, known as phase five.

The county council, which is a joint shareholder of the site, says the money will fund a new building "of significant size" for a range of small high-tech companies to move into.

The park, which originally opened back in 1997, is home to 23 technology-based firms and employs about 300 people but is full to capacity.

It has been so successful that an extension is about to take place now, phase four, with a 25,000 sq ft building being constructed.

West Worcestershire MP Harriett Baldwin said: "I am particularly pleased to see money committed to the growth of Malvern Hills Science Park which will allow it to offer more space for start-ups and growing small business.

"This is fantastic news and is a great reward for the hard work put in by the Local Enterprise Partnership to secure some important funding to support our county’s long-term economic plan."

The LEP award also includes £800,000 towards improving vocational training, beefing up links between education providers and businesses, and encouraging engineering apprenticeships.

Superfast broadband in Worcestershire has also secured £2.4 million, meaning the existing £20 million project is being improved.

Under an existing county council and BT project, 90 per cent of Worcestershire was going to be able to access superfast speeds by 2017.

The extra money means the target is being increased to 95 per cent of homes and businesses.

Meanwhile Kidderminster Railway Station is getting £5 million for a revamp.

Worcestershire's LEP says it will continue to press its 10-year strategy, which included bids totalling £280 million, in the expectation of more money after 2019/20.

The £47 million of direct Government funding is from a nationwide pot worth £2 billion per year, which all 39 LEPs across the country were invited to bid for.

Worcestershire’s bids included more than 50 proposed projects, and over the next five years eight are now almost certain to go ahead but many others, like £63 million to dual Carrington Bridge and £4 million for Pershore College, remain uncertain.

The county did ask for £48 million alone in 2015/16, and ended up with £13 million for that particular year, with only Cumbria getting a smaller share.

Chairman Peter Pawsey said: "Of course we would always have liked more cash but the allocated fund was massively oversubscribed and together with other funding streams, including those from Europe and council resources, we can make some very significant progress on our priority schemes."

HOW WORCESTER WILL BENEFIT FROM THE CASH BOOST

WORCESTER has emerged as one of the big winners from yesterday's Government Growth Fund award - with £12 million earmarked towards major changes to the A4440 Southern Link Road.

The money will allow Norton roundabout to be enlarged, and dual-track the section leading towards Whittington island, easing congestion along one of the city's most notorious routes.

The work, which will start some time in 2016, is designed to follow on from the current £8 million enlargement of the Ketch island.

Another big victory for Worcester was £700,000 towards flooding alleviation, which will focus on some kind of solution for New Road.

During last winter's floods, rising water onto the busy route led to the main Worcester Bridge having to close.

The Growth Fund has allocated the £300,000 for 2015/16 and another £3.3 million will then arrive for further flooding protection across Worcestershire in 2016/17.

A total of £4 million will go towards getting Worcester Technology Park off the ground, funding proper access off Junction 6 of the M5, while the Hoo Brook Link Road in Kidderminster has secured £1.1 million.

Worcester MP Robin Walker said: "This growth deal is about more than just infrastructure, it is about skills and growth for the whole county."

Comments (54)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:58am Tue 8 Jul 14

CYNIC_AL says...

So a brand new station not actually in or close to the city centre? What a great idea! Does that mean even more buses clogging up our roads to ferry pepple into the city from Norton? Why not redevelop Shrub Hill as it's old, drab and in desperate need of a makeover.
So a brand new station not actually in or close to the city centre? What a great idea! Does that mean even more buses clogging up our roads to ferry pepple into the city from Norton? Why not redevelop Shrub Hill as it's old, drab and in desperate need of a makeover. CYNIC_AL
  • Score: -16

10:00am Tue 8 Jul 14

Andy_R says...

In one paragraph we did terribly, with only Cumbria getting less money, then later on we're "one of the big winners"! Make your mind up, Worcester News!
In one paragraph we did terribly, with only Cumbria getting less money, then later on we're "one of the big winners"! Make your mind up, Worcester News! Andy_R
  • Score: 16

10:49am Tue 8 Jul 14

Robot 3021 says...

Long-awaited dream? Just whose dreams are we talking about here? I don't know a single person who has mentioned this as a dream, or a hope, or even a passing fancy. It's just not on anyone's agenda full stop.

Anyway, last night I dreamt a giant carrot was stealing my socks and throwing them at rabbits. Where's my much needed investment?
Long-awaited dream? Just whose dreams are we talking about here? I don't know a single person who has mentioned this as a dream, or a hope, or even a passing fancy. It's just not on anyone's agenda full stop. Anyway, last night I dreamt a giant carrot was stealing my socks and throwing them at rabbits. Where's my much needed investment? Robot 3021
  • Score: -1

10:55am Tue 8 Jul 14

gemma6 says...

It's great for us lot living in St Peter's. About time we had something instead of roadworks and traffic jams.
It's great for us lot living in St Peter's. About time we had something instead of roadworks and traffic jams. gemma6
  • Score: 17

11:03am Tue 8 Jul 14

Pomygranit says...

It probably just me but how does a Parkway station bring in investment. A parkway station will be used by those people who live here wanting to travel somewhere else.

How does it bring people in?

And how do you get £700K for some kind of project?
It probably just me but how does a Parkway station bring in investment. A parkway station will be used by those people who live here wanting to travel somewhere else. How does it bring people in? And how do you get £700K for some kind of project? Pomygranit
  • Score: 5

11:35am Tue 8 Jul 14

brooksider says...

CYNIC_AL wrote:
So a brand new station not actually in or close to the city centre? What a great idea! Does that mean even more buses clogging up our roads to ferry pepple into the city from Norton? Why not redevelop Shrub Hill as it's old, drab and in desperate need of a makeover.
Another expensive folly from this Council.
As with the Incinerator, Worcestershire County Council applied for money from the Government.
On both occasions the plans were deemed to be poor value for money but the Council have pressed ahead regardless.

It is very alarming that the Council are prioritising this scheme whilst cutting back on spending on vocational training.

Is relying on parking charges a legitimate way to fund this project or is Geraghty using the same flawed economics that created the PFI disaster?
[quote][p][bold]CYNIC_AL[/bold] wrote: So a brand new station not actually in or close to the city centre? What a great idea! Does that mean even more buses clogging up our roads to ferry pepple into the city from Norton? Why not redevelop Shrub Hill as it's old, drab and in desperate need of a makeover.[/p][/quote]Another expensive folly from this Council. As with the Incinerator, Worcestershire County Council applied for money from the Government. On both occasions the plans were deemed to be poor value for money but the Council have pressed ahead regardless. It is very alarming that the Council are prioritising this scheme whilst cutting back on spending on vocational training. Is relying on parking charges a legitimate way to fund this project or is Geraghty using the same flawed economics that created the PFI disaster? brooksider
  • Score: 3

11:40am Tue 8 Jul 14

Casmal says...

CYNIC_AL wrote:
So a brand new station not actually in or close to the city centre? What a great idea! Does that mean even more buses clogging up our roads to ferry pepple into the city from Norton? Why not redevelop Shrub Hill as it's old, drab and in desperate need of a makeover.
And more cars clogging up the A4440, including, of course, the Carrington Bridge, to get to the station!!!
[quote][p][bold]CYNIC_AL[/bold] wrote: So a brand new station not actually in or close to the city centre? What a great idea! Does that mean even more buses clogging up our roads to ferry pepple into the city from Norton? Why not redevelop Shrub Hill as it's old, drab and in desperate need of a makeover.[/p][/quote]And more cars clogging up the A4440, including, of course, the Carrington Bridge, to get to the station!!! Casmal
  • Score: 14

12:18pm Tue 8 Jul 14

Jason White says...

Worcester Parkway will open up the city to destinations all over the UK without the need to change trains. This will offer a seismic shift in the right direction to transform rail travel in the county which has never been seen before. Shrub Hill has always been inadequate due to the nature of rail geography in the area. Cynics need to wise up and take the blinkers off in order to see the bigger picture. Well done to all those who have tirelessly worked to bring this project to a point where funding is now secured and I look forward to using the facility in the future. Jason White.
Worcester Parkway will open up the city to destinations all over the UK without the need to change trains. This will offer a seismic shift in the right direction to transform rail travel in the county which has never been seen before. Shrub Hill has always been inadequate due to the nature of rail geography in the area. Cynics need to wise up and take the blinkers off in order to see the bigger picture. Well done to all those who have tirelessly worked to bring this project to a point where funding is now secured and I look forward to using the facility in the future. Jason White. Jason White
  • Score: 26

12:38pm Tue 8 Jul 14

uptonX says...

Worcester Parkway will actually do very little to help the city. For those wishing to travel to London that "Thomas tank engine" route through the Cotswolds, although pretty is unreliable, slower and more expensive than travelling from Birmingham, Warwick or Chelt. What it will do is encourage housing development targeted at commuters to Birmingham. Only about 5% of UK people use trains and that isn't going to change any time soon. The big story here is no funding for the desperately needed road bridge, making the current "improvements" all the more pointless and showing that when it comes to negotiating at a national level and getting their fair share the Worcester Councils are outclassed by just about everyone else.
Worcester Parkway will actually do very little to help the city. For those wishing to travel to London that "Thomas tank engine" route through the Cotswolds, although pretty is unreliable, slower and more expensive than travelling from Birmingham, Warwick or Chelt. What it will do is encourage housing development targeted at commuters to Birmingham. Only about 5% of UK people use trains and that isn't going to change any time soon. The big story here is no funding for the desperately needed road bridge, making the current "improvements" all the more pointless and showing that when it comes to negotiating at a national level and getting their fair share the Worcester Councils are outclassed by just about everyone else. uptonX
  • Score: 0

12:47pm Tue 8 Jul 14

trundle says...

I'm afraid all investment in the Worcester areas is pointless and poor value for money until the severe traffic congestion in the city is sorted by DUELLING THE CARRINGTON BRIDGE! Everybody knows this but county councillors on their high salaries and in their ivory towers seem to think that the general public who keep telling them this, (as we live travel and work in the area!), and due to their astounding arrogance ignore and plough ahead with white elephant fan-fared schemes which they think make them and the council seem like value for money.
I'm afraid all investment in the Worcester areas is pointless and poor value for money until the severe traffic congestion in the city is sorted by DUELLING THE CARRINGTON BRIDGE! Everybody knows this but county councillors on their high salaries and in their ivory towers seem to think that the general public who keep telling them this, (as we live travel and work in the area!), and due to their astounding arrogance ignore and plough ahead with white elephant fan-fared schemes which they think make them and the council seem like value for money. trundle
  • Score: 3

2:03pm Tue 8 Jul 14

brooksider says...

Jason White wrote:
Worcester Parkway will open up the city to destinations all over the UK without the need to change trains. This will offer a seismic shift in the right direction to transform rail travel in the county which has never been seen before. Shrub Hill has always been inadequate due to the nature of rail geography in the area. Cynics need to wise up and take the blinkers off in order to see the bigger picture. Well done to all those who have tirelessly worked to bring this project to a point where funding is now secured and I look forward to using the facility in the future. Jason White.
Spoken like a true developer.

Funding hasn't been secured, there is a huge shortfall.

Your lack of knowledge about the history of this County's 'rail geography' is astounding.

Unfortunately the cynics do see the real picture and realise the developers and landowners are going to profit at the expense of the taxpayer with very little benefit.
[quote][p][bold]Jason White[/bold] wrote: Worcester Parkway will open up the city to destinations all over the UK without the need to change trains. This will offer a seismic shift in the right direction to transform rail travel in the county which has never been seen before. Shrub Hill has always been inadequate due to the nature of rail geography in the area. Cynics need to wise up and take the blinkers off in order to see the bigger picture. Well done to all those who have tirelessly worked to bring this project to a point where funding is now secured and I look forward to using the facility in the future. Jason White.[/p][/quote]Spoken like a true developer. Funding hasn't been secured, there is a huge shortfall. Your lack of knowledge about the history of this County's 'rail geography' is astounding. Unfortunately the cynics do see the real picture and realise the developers and landowners are going to profit at the expense of the taxpayer with very little benefit. brooksider
  • Score: -2

3:30pm Tue 8 Jul 14

Andy_R says...

Given that Network Rail made £2,217 million in profits last year, why do they need to be given any money at all? No other business would be given these sort of bribes to do what they are already doing very profitably!
Given that Network Rail made £2,217 million in profits last year, why do they need to be given any money at all? No other business would be given these sort of bribes to do what they are already doing very profitably! Andy_R
  • Score: 8

3:54pm Tue 8 Jul 14

Marrowman says...

I am saddened, but not unsurprised how closeted some of the viewpoints put forward are: it just proves to me the criticality of constructing Worcestershire Parkway to connect Worcestershire quickly to the outside world. I moved my business to Gloucester in 2007 - why? Mainly because the rail links were so poor and unreliable that I couldn't get to my clients in the west/east midland cities and London and the south-east easily. It actually made better sense for me to move south, as me and my colleagues can zip up to Brum from Cheltenham station in 40 minutes, or down to Bristol in the same amount of time. The road links make it easy to get to Heathrow and the South East, and the train journey is reliably just under 2 hours to central London, which is workable.

I still live in Worcestershire (for now), but I'm now just one of the growing numbers of people heading south on the M5 to take part in Gloucestershire's booming economy. The reality is that Worcester (and to a lesser extent south Worcestershire) is not that great a place to do business. The transport links are slow and congested, there is a severe dearth of suitable employment office space and warehousing, and (in Worcester's case) the local population are under-skilled.

Essentially, most of Worcester's residents are the descendants of simple farm labourers who were displaced during the Industrial revolution and came to the city looking for menial work (which is tragically no longer available). Those with qualifications/skill
s either leave the city in search of work or commute out, causing congestion. Those who remain are under-skilled and poorly paid, which is why large parts of the city are made up of low-income council estates (Warndon, Ronkswood, Dines Green etc). If this city's fortunes are to change, we need to get these people upskilled and employed in wealth creating industries which pay well.

The reality is that dualling the Southern Link Road (rather than duelling, which would involve picking a fight with it! ha ha) isn't going to solve Worcester's problems, as Brooksider says, it will just facilitate (mainly residential) development in Malvern and south/west Worcester, which will fill up the 'new' capacity and leave the city in the same state.

Parkway makes sense – Worcestershire NEEDS better access to neighbouring markets if it wants to attract businesses here, create jobs and reduce local people's commutes to work, which will reduce congestion and make us richer. I will do everything I can to support this scheme and those promoting it.
I am saddened, but not unsurprised how closeted some of the viewpoints put forward are: it just proves to me the criticality of constructing Worcestershire Parkway to connect Worcestershire quickly to the outside world. I moved my business to Gloucester in 2007 - why? Mainly because the rail links were so poor and unreliable that I couldn't get to my clients in the west/east midland cities and London and the south-east easily. It actually made better sense for me to move south, as me and my colleagues can zip up to Brum from Cheltenham station in 40 minutes, or down to Bristol in the same amount of time. The road links make it easy to get to Heathrow and the South East, and the train journey is reliably just under 2 hours to central London, which is workable. I still live in Worcestershire (for now), but I'm now just one of the growing numbers of people heading south on the M5 to take part in Gloucestershire's booming economy. The reality is that Worcester (and to a lesser extent south Worcestershire) is not that great a place to do business. The transport links are slow and congested, there is a severe dearth of suitable employment office space and warehousing, and (in Worcester's case) the local population are under-skilled. Essentially, most of Worcester's residents are the descendants of simple farm labourers who were displaced during the Industrial revolution and came to the city looking for menial work (which is tragically no longer available). Those with qualifications/skill s either leave the city in search of work or commute out, causing congestion. Those who remain are under-skilled and poorly paid, which is why large parts of the city are made up of low-income council estates (Warndon, Ronkswood, Dines Green etc). If this city's fortunes are to change, we need to get these people upskilled and employed in wealth creating industries which pay well. The reality is that dualling the Southern Link Road (rather than duelling, which would involve picking a fight with it! ha ha) isn't going to solve Worcester's problems, as Brooksider says, it will just facilitate (mainly residential) development in Malvern and south/west Worcester, which will fill up the 'new' capacity and leave the city in the same state. Parkway makes sense – Worcestershire NEEDS better access to neighbouring markets if it wants to attract businesses here, create jobs and reduce local people's commutes to work, which will reduce congestion and make us richer. I will do everything I can to support this scheme and those promoting it. Marrowman
  • Score: 27

4:03pm Tue 8 Jul 14

bmoc55 says...

A beter rail link will increase business opportunities in Worcester. Currently the links to London/Birmingham are shocking.
Development is good for Worcester, but too many negative half cup empty whingers can't see it
A beter rail link will increase business opportunities in Worcester. Currently the links to London/Birmingham are shocking. Development is good for Worcester, but too many negative half cup empty whingers can't see it bmoc55
  • Score: 17

4:15pm Tue 8 Jul 14

its all spin says...

Jason White wrote:
Worcester Parkway will open up the city to destinations all over the UK without the need to change trains. This will offer a seismic shift in the right direction to transform rail travel in the county which has never been seen before. Shrub Hill has always been inadequate due to the nature of rail geography in the area. Cynics need to wise up and take the blinkers off in order to see the bigger picture. Well done to all those who have tirelessly worked to bring this project to a point where funding is now secured and I look forward to using the facility in the future. Jason White.
I can remember catching through trains from Shrub Hill to Leeds and Torquay, Cardiff and Nottingham in the70s and 80s, it was only the old BR who decided to stop these services because the end to end journey time was too long and coming round into Droitwich and Worcester from the main line added too much time, never mind that the service got worse by replacing it with the type of service we have today; hardly progress, I would say, just a return to what we once had and at what cost, worse services from the city , perhaps?
[quote][p][bold]Jason White[/bold] wrote: Worcester Parkway will open up the city to destinations all over the UK without the need to change trains. This will offer a seismic shift in the right direction to transform rail travel in the county which has never been seen before. Shrub Hill has always been inadequate due to the nature of rail geography in the area. Cynics need to wise up and take the blinkers off in order to see the bigger picture. Well done to all those who have tirelessly worked to bring this project to a point where funding is now secured and I look forward to using the facility in the future. Jason White.[/p][/quote]I can remember catching through trains from Shrub Hill to Leeds and Torquay, Cardiff and Nottingham in the70s and 80s, it was only the old BR who decided to stop these services because the end to end journey time was too long and coming round into Droitwich and Worcester from the main line added too much time, never mind that the service got worse by replacing it with the type of service we have today; hardly progress, I would say, just a return to what we once had and at what cost, worse services from the city , perhaps? its all spin
  • Score: 2

4:34pm Tue 8 Jul 14

CSquared says...

bridge
bridge CSquared
  • Score: 0

5:18pm Tue 8 Jul 14

skychip says...

Do I take it then that this Parkway will definitely go ahead after the purchase of the necessary land etc.
Do I take it then that this Parkway will definitely go ahead after the purchase of the necessary land etc. skychip
  • Score: 0

5:19pm Tue 8 Jul 14

Ex-St Johns says...

In terms of attracting business and tourists to the city, those coming from London are already served by the line from Paddington. Visitors from the Black Country are already served by the line via Kiddy. That line, slow as it is, brings them in from Birmingham too. The only people the new station will serve, perhaps, will be those coming from the North and the South-West. The one thing that will make this work is new timetables on the Shrub Hill-Paddington route and on the Brum-Cheltenham route that goes through Norton and which will have a new stop at Worcester Parkway. If a traveller from Leeds gets off at Parkway and then has to wait 45 minutes for a connection into Worcester he won't use the service again. And please don't suggest he can "simply call a taxi". Taxi fares from parkways into urban areas sometimes cost more than the actual long-distance train fare and really cheese off travellers. Therefore, if you cannot guarantee efficient transfer times don't bother with it and change trains in Birmingham as usual. I am generally in favour but fear that the various train companies won't talk to each other and that the station will only really be a boon for Norton residents. This station could of course be the south-eastern terminus of a Worcester-Droitwich-
Malvern "S-Bahn" system using the existing tracks between the three places. In that case Parkway will have a train every ten minutes into the city centre and to new stops such as Henwick Central and Fernhill Heath Interchange. Short-term it will cost a fortune but long-term it will reduce pollution and make life easier for all. Think big, Worcester!
In terms of attracting business and tourists to the city, those coming from London are already served by the line from Paddington. Visitors from the Black Country are already served by the line via Kiddy. That line, slow as it is, brings them in from Birmingham too. The only people the new station will serve, perhaps, will be those coming from the North and the South-West. The one thing that will make this work is new timetables on the Shrub Hill-Paddington route and on the Brum-Cheltenham route that goes through Norton and which will have a new stop at Worcester Parkway. If a traveller from Leeds gets off at Parkway and then has to wait 45 minutes for a connection into Worcester he won't use the service again. And please don't suggest he can "simply call a taxi". Taxi fares from parkways into urban areas sometimes cost more than the actual long-distance train fare and really cheese off travellers. Therefore, if you cannot guarantee efficient transfer times don't bother with it and change trains in Birmingham as usual. I am generally in favour but fear that the various train companies won't talk to each other and that the station will only really be a boon for Norton residents. This station could of course be the south-eastern terminus of a Worcester-Droitwich- Malvern "S-Bahn" system using the existing tracks between the three places. In that case Parkway will have a train every ten minutes into the city centre and to new stops such as Henwick Central and Fernhill Heath Interchange. Short-term it will cost a fortune but long-term it will reduce pollution and make life easier for all. Think big, Worcester! Ex-St Johns
  • Score: 10

6:12pm Tue 8 Jul 14

Jason White says...

Marrowman has hit the nail squarely on the head with his comments. Whilst towns and cities such as Cheltenham, Gloucester, Birmingham and Bristol have forged ahead with new development and finance to enhance and grow their economies, Worcester has been punching below its weight for decades. Worcester Parkway will be a vital tool to thrust the city into the fast lane of business and tourism markets and we can finally start playing on a level field with our competitors. So if you want Worcester to be a successful and prosperous place to live, work and visit, get behind the Parkway project. If you don't then put your head back in the sand.
Marrowman has hit the nail squarely on the head with his comments. Whilst towns and cities such as Cheltenham, Gloucester, Birmingham and Bristol have forged ahead with new development and finance to enhance and grow their economies, Worcester has been punching below its weight for decades. Worcester Parkway will be a vital tool to thrust the city into the fast lane of business and tourism markets and we can finally start playing on a level field with our competitors. So if you want Worcester to be a successful and prosperous place to live, work and visit, get behind the Parkway project. If you don't then put your head back in the sand. Jason White
  • Score: 12

6:20pm Tue 8 Jul 14

THE FACTS says...

Jason White wrote:
Worcester Parkway will open up the city to destinations all over the UK without the need to change trains. This will offer a seismic shift in the right direction to transform rail travel in the county which has never been seen before. Shrub Hill has always been inadequate due to the nature of rail geography in the area. Cynics need to wise up and take the blinkers off in order to see the bigger picture. Well done to all those who have tirelessly worked to bring this project to a point where funding is now secured and I look forward to using the facility in the future. Jason White.
Anyone got the route stations what's the first 3 south stations and first 3 north stations?
[quote][p][bold]Jason White[/bold] wrote: Worcester Parkway will open up the city to destinations all over the UK without the need to change trains. This will offer a seismic shift in the right direction to transform rail travel in the county which has never been seen before. Shrub Hill has always been inadequate due to the nature of rail geography in the area. Cynics need to wise up and take the blinkers off in order to see the bigger picture. Well done to all those who have tirelessly worked to bring this project to a point where funding is now secured and I look forward to using the facility in the future. Jason White.[/p][/quote]Anyone got the route stations what's the first 3 south stations and first 3 north stations? THE FACTS
  • Score: 0

7:44pm Tue 8 Jul 14

brooksider says...

THE FACTS wrote:
Jason White wrote:
Worcester Parkway will open up the city to destinations all over the UK without the need to change trains. This will offer a seismic shift in the right direction to transform rail travel in the county which has never been seen before. Shrub Hill has always been inadequate due to the nature of rail geography in the area. Cynics need to wise up and take the blinkers off in order to see the bigger picture. Well done to all those who have tirelessly worked to bring this project to a point where funding is now secured and I look forward to using the facility in the future. Jason White.
Anyone got the route stations what's the first 3 south stations and first 3 north stations?
What's this?
Worcestershire's answer to Mornington Crescent?
[quote][p][bold]THE FACTS[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jason White[/bold] wrote: Worcester Parkway will open up the city to destinations all over the UK without the need to change trains. This will offer a seismic shift in the right direction to transform rail travel in the county which has never been seen before. Shrub Hill has always been inadequate due to the nature of rail geography in the area. Cynics need to wise up and take the blinkers off in order to see the bigger picture. Well done to all those who have tirelessly worked to bring this project to a point where funding is now secured and I look forward to using the facility in the future. Jason White.[/p][/quote]Anyone got the route stations what's the first 3 south stations and first 3 north stations?[/p][/quote]What's this? Worcestershire's answer to Mornington Crescent? brooksider
  • Score: -5

8:53pm Tue 8 Jul 14

WS1991 says...

@Marrowman, I agree with a few of your points. I too am miffed as to why people seem to be against a train station that will link Worcester with all parts of the country. Why wouldn't anybody want that? However it is a massive, massive assumption that Worcester's residents are the descendants of simple farm labourers and are therefore low paid. An assumption that I would also say is wrong. How far are you going back here because from my memory Worcester's industry hasn't done too badly for a long time. Surely we are more recent descendants of Glove and porcelain makers and more recently many many people worked at the likes of Kays and nPower. I'd also sat that ''those who remain are under-skilled and poorly paid, which is why large parts of the city are made up of low-income council estates'' is also a tad harsh and massively over-exagerrated. Every single city has its council estates. Worcester may have more than Cheltenham but it certainly has less than Gloucester, and less than many, many other places, even in comparison to its size. You use this as a basis for your argument that Worcester has a lot of unskilled and low income residents. Well what about the many, many more affluent suburbs that we have such as Norton, Warndon Villages, St Johns, Claines, Northwick, Britannia Square, Hanbury Park, Rushwick, Hallow, Battenhall, Fernhill Heath and parts of Nunnery? Do under skilled and underpaid people really live in these places? Absolutely not. Worcester is no worse off than any other place in the country in this respect and better than many. We have council estates and we have very nice areas. We have low paid workers and we have highly paid workers.

@Ex- St Johns. I fully agree with your idea and think it should happen. Why not use this Worcester Parkway station idea to then create a 'central Worcestershire rail service' which can take workers to/from our towns on a line which runs Evesham-Pershore-Par
kway-Shrub Hill-Foregate-Henwic
k Road- Malvern Link- Great Malvern, with a fork up to Fernhill Heath and Droitwich Spa for certain services. Put it on every 10 minutes in rush hours and then every 30 minutes throughout the day. Surely this would help solve some of our traffic problems whilst also being a quick and environmentally friendly way of transporting workers. Obviously expensive in the short term, but long term it could be invaluable.
@Marrowman, I agree with a few of your points. I too am miffed as to why people seem to be against a train station that will link Worcester with all parts of the country. Why wouldn't anybody want that? However it is a massive, massive assumption that Worcester's residents are the descendants of simple farm labourers and are therefore low paid. An assumption that I would also say is wrong. How far are you going back here because from my memory Worcester's industry hasn't done too badly for a long time. Surely we are more recent descendants of Glove and porcelain makers and more recently many many people worked at the likes of Kays and nPower. I'd also sat that ''those who remain are under-skilled and poorly paid, which is why large parts of the city are made up of low-income council estates'' is also a tad harsh and massively over-exagerrated. Every single city has its council estates. Worcester may have more than Cheltenham but it certainly has less than Gloucester, and less than many, many other places, even in comparison to its size. You use this as a basis for your argument that Worcester has a lot of unskilled and low income residents. Well what about the many, many more affluent suburbs that we have such as Norton, Warndon Villages, St Johns, Claines, Northwick, Britannia Square, Hanbury Park, Rushwick, Hallow, Battenhall, Fernhill Heath and parts of Nunnery? Do under skilled and underpaid people really live in these places? Absolutely not. Worcester is no worse off than any other place in the country in this respect and better than many. We have council estates and we have very nice areas. We have low paid workers and we have highly paid workers. @Ex- St Johns. I fully agree with your idea and think it should happen. Why not use this Worcester Parkway station idea to then create a 'central Worcestershire rail service' which can take workers to/from our towns on a line which runs Evesham-Pershore-Par kway-Shrub Hill-Foregate-Henwic k Road- Malvern Link- Great Malvern, with a fork up to Fernhill Heath and Droitwich Spa for certain services. Put it on every 10 minutes in rush hours and then every 30 minutes throughout the day. Surely this would help solve some of our traffic problems whilst also being a quick and environmentally friendly way of transporting workers. Obviously expensive in the short term, but long term it could be invaluable. WS1991
  • Score: 7

8:57pm Tue 8 Jul 14

WorcesterLad2000 says...

CYNIC_AL wrote:
So a brand new station not actually in or close to the city centre? What a great idea! Does that mean even more buses clogging up our roads to ferry pepple into the city from Norton? Why not redevelop Shrub Hill as it's old, drab and in desperate need of a makeover.
There's no point redeveloping Shrub Hill because Foregate St gets the same services and the parkway station has to be built outside the city centre to be built on a different line (providing direct services to Edinburgh, Penzance, Nottingham, Leeds and Cardiff) which currently aren't direct from WOS or WOF. And another great idea would be to have shuttle trains to ferry people from the city centre to Norton that way there'll be less people on roads and more people on trains!
[quote][p][bold]CYNIC_AL[/bold] wrote: So a brand new station not actually in or close to the city centre? What a great idea! Does that mean even more buses clogging up our roads to ferry pepple into the city from Norton? Why not redevelop Shrub Hill as it's old, drab and in desperate need of a makeover.[/p][/quote]There's no point redeveloping Shrub Hill because Foregate St gets the same services and the parkway station has to be built outside the city centre to be built on a different line (providing direct services to Edinburgh, Penzance, Nottingham, Leeds and Cardiff) which currently aren't direct from WOS or WOF. And another great idea would be to have shuttle trains to ferry people from the city centre to Norton that way there'll be less people on roads and more people on trains! WorcesterLad2000
  • Score: 8

8:59pm Tue 8 Jul 14

WorcesterLad2000 says...

THE FACTS wrote:
Jason White wrote:
Worcester Parkway will open up the city to destinations all over the UK without the need to change trains. This will offer a seismic shift in the right direction to transform rail travel in the county which has never been seen before. Shrub Hill has always been inadequate due to the nature of rail geography in the area. Cynics need to wise up and take the blinkers off in order to see the bigger picture. Well done to all those who have tirelessly worked to bring this project to a point where funding is now secured and I look forward to using the facility in the future. Jason White.
Anyone got the route stations what's the first 3 south stations and first 3 north stations?
Now this depends on the time table but generally the first 3 north stations are Birmingham New Street, Burton-on-Trent, Derby. The first 3 south stations are (sometimes Gloucester) Cheltenham Spa, Bristol Parkway and Bristol Temple Meads.
[quote][p][bold]THE FACTS[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jason White[/bold] wrote: Worcester Parkway will open up the city to destinations all over the UK without the need to change trains. This will offer a seismic shift in the right direction to transform rail travel in the county which has never been seen before. Shrub Hill has always been inadequate due to the nature of rail geography in the area. Cynics need to wise up and take the blinkers off in order to see the bigger picture. Well done to all those who have tirelessly worked to bring this project to a point where funding is now secured and I look forward to using the facility in the future. Jason White.[/p][/quote]Anyone got the route stations what's the first 3 south stations and first 3 north stations?[/p][/quote]Now this depends on the time table but generally the first 3 north stations are Birmingham New Street, Burton-on-Trent, Derby. The first 3 south stations are (sometimes Gloucester) Cheltenham Spa, Bristol Parkway and Bristol Temple Meads. WorcesterLad2000
  • Score: 8

9:02pm Tue 8 Jul 14

Small Town says...

Worcester Parkway - What a joke!

A city the size of Glasgow or Bristol benefits from the parkway concept because of the congestion such a larger conurbation as those suffers, a large market town like Worcester is incomparable and it will simply bring zero benefit.

The congestion in the Worcester even at peak times (8:15 - 9:10 and 16:35 - 17:30) could at the most be classed as variable, nothing at all like the near stand still rush hours in proper cities.

So, the parkway stop, great - just another to add to what feels like 20 odd stops between New Street and London Paddington. If they want to make REAL investment in improvement, then they improve lines to run a regular Express train service from Worcester to London, stopping only at Oxford. Now that would be progress.
Worcester Parkway - What a joke! A city the size of Glasgow or Bristol benefits from the parkway concept because of the congestion such a larger conurbation as those suffers, a large market town like Worcester is incomparable and it will simply bring zero benefit. The congestion in the Worcester even at peak times (8:15 - 9:10 and 16:35 - 17:30) could at the most be classed as variable, nothing at all like the near stand still rush hours in proper cities. So, the parkway stop, great - just another to add to what feels like 20 odd stops between New Street and London Paddington. If they want to make REAL investment in improvement, then they improve lines to run a regular Express train service from Worcester to London, stopping only at Oxford. Now that would be progress. Small Town
  • Score: -5

9:04pm Tue 8 Jul 14

WorcesterLad2000 says...

Being able to get to Birmingham in 20 minutes will change everything! Hopefully a whole new development lie Warndon Villages will pop up around Norton making Worcester a world class city and making it easy fro people to commute into Birmingham.
Being able to get to Birmingham in 20 minutes will change everything! Hopefully a whole new development lie Warndon Villages will pop up around Norton making Worcester a world class city and making it easy fro people to commute into Birmingham. WorcesterLad2000
  • Score: 12

9:05pm Tue 8 Jul 14

WorcesterLad2000 says...

bmoc55 wrote:
A beter rail link will increase business opportunities in Worcester. Currently the links to London/Birmingham are shocking.
Development is good for Worcester, but too many negative half cup empty whingers can't see it
100 % Agree !!!!
[quote][p][bold]bmoc55[/bold] wrote: A beter rail link will increase business opportunities in Worcester. Currently the links to London/Birmingham are shocking. Development is good for Worcester, but too many negative half cup empty whingers can't see it[/p][/quote]100 % Agree !!!! WorcesterLad2000
  • Score: 10

9:09pm Tue 8 Jul 14

WorcesterLad2000 says...

Its about time Worcester County Council got their act together and have finally taped into the increasing amount of people now using the railways in Britain. I just hope I'm the person who gets to cut the ribbon on the opening day of the parkway :)
Its about time Worcester County Council got their act together and have finally taped into the increasing amount of people now using the railways in Britain. I just hope I'm the person who gets to cut the ribbon on the opening day of the parkway :) WorcesterLad2000
  • Score: 4

9:15pm Tue 8 Jul 14

WorcesterLad2000 says...

Small Town wrote:
Worcester Parkway - What a joke!

A city the size of Glasgow or Bristol benefits from the parkway concept because of the congestion such a larger conurbation as those suffers, a large market town like Worcester is incomparable and it will simply bring zero benefit.

The congestion in the Worcester even at peak times (8:15 - 9:10 and 16:35 - 17:30) could at the most be classed as variable, nothing at all like the near stand still rush hours in proper cities.

So, the parkway stop, great - just another to add to what feels like 20 odd stops between New Street and London Paddington. If they want to make REAL investment in improvement, then they improve lines to run a regular Express train service from Worcester to London, stopping only at Oxford. Now that would be progress.
There aren't any direct services from New Street to London Paddington (did you mean Foregate Street?) . It will actually make journey times about 6/9 minutes shorter going to London from the Parkway and it wouldn't add to the amount of stations because WOS (Worcester Shrub Hill) will close anyway. But yes an Express train service Worcester to London, stopping only at Oxford would be incredible - but I'm afraid more a dream than reality.
[quote][p][bold]Small Town[/bold] wrote: Worcester Parkway - What a joke! A city the size of Glasgow or Bristol benefits from the parkway concept because of the congestion such a larger conurbation as those suffers, a large market town like Worcester is incomparable and it will simply bring zero benefit. The congestion in the Worcester even at peak times (8:15 - 9:10 and 16:35 - 17:30) could at the most be classed as variable, nothing at all like the near stand still rush hours in proper cities. So, the parkway stop, great - just another to add to what feels like 20 odd stops between New Street and London Paddington. If they want to make REAL investment in improvement, then they improve lines to run a regular Express train service from Worcester to London, stopping only at Oxford. Now that would be progress.[/p][/quote]There aren't any direct services from New Street to London Paddington (did you mean Foregate Street?) . It will actually make journey times about 6/9 minutes shorter going to London from the Parkway and it wouldn't add to the amount of stations because WOS (Worcester Shrub Hill) will close anyway. But yes an Express train service Worcester to London, stopping only at Oxford would be incredible - but I'm afraid more a dream than reality. WorcesterLad2000
  • Score: 1

9:17pm Tue 8 Jul 14

WorcesterLad2000 says...

Casmal wrote:
CYNIC_AL wrote:
So a brand new station not actually in or close to the city centre? What a great idea! Does that mean even more buses clogging up our roads to ferry pepple into the city from Norton? Why not redevelop Shrub Hill as it's old, drab and in desperate need of a makeover.
And more cars clogging up the A4440, including, of course, the Carrington Bridge, to get to the station!!!
Thats why the £53m funding is dualling the carrington bridge - read the article properly!
[quote][p][bold]Casmal[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CYNIC_AL[/bold] wrote: So a brand new station not actually in or close to the city centre? What a great idea! Does that mean even more buses clogging up our roads to ferry pepple into the city from Norton? Why not redevelop Shrub Hill as it's old, drab and in desperate need of a makeover.[/p][/quote]And more cars clogging up the A4440, including, of course, the Carrington Bridge, to get to the station!!![/p][/quote]Thats why the £53m funding is dualling the carrington bridge - read the article properly! WorcesterLad2000
  • Score: -1

9:24pm Tue 8 Jul 14

Small Town says...

Marrowman wrote:
I am saddened, but not unsurprised how closeted some of the viewpoints put forward are: it just proves to me the criticality of constructing Worcestershire Parkway to connect Worcestershire quickly to the outside world. I moved my business to Gloucester in 2007 - why? Mainly because the rail links were so poor and unreliable that I couldn't get to my clients in the west/east midland cities and London and the south-east easily. It actually made better sense for me to move south, as me and my colleagues can zip up to Brum from Cheltenham station in 40 minutes, or down to Bristol in the same amount of time. The road links make it easy to get to Heathrow and the South East, and the train journey is reliably just under 2 hours to central London, which is workable.

I still live in Worcestershire (for now), but I'm now just one of the growing numbers of people heading south on the M5 to take part in Gloucestershire's booming economy. The reality is that Worcester (and to a lesser extent south Worcestershire) is not that great a place to do business. The transport links are slow and congested, there is a severe dearth of suitable employment office space and warehousing, and (in Worcester's case) the local population are under-skilled.

Essentially, most of Worcester's residents are the descendants of simple farm labourers who were displaced during the Industrial revolution and came to the city looking for menial work (which is tragically no longer available). Those with qualifications/skill

s either leave the city in search of work or commute out, causing congestion. Those who remain are under-skilled and poorly paid, which is why large parts of the city are made up of low-income council estates (Warndon, Ronkswood, Dines Green etc). If this city's fortunes are to change, we need to get these people upskilled and employed in wealth creating industries which pay well.

The reality is that dualling the Southern Link Road (rather than duelling, which would involve picking a fight with it! ha ha) isn't going to solve Worcester's problems, as Brooksider says, it will just facilitate (mainly residential) development in Malvern and south/west Worcester, which will fill up the 'new' capacity and leave the city in the same state.

Parkway makes sense – Worcestershire NEEDS better access to neighbouring markets if it wants to attract businesses here, create jobs and reduce local people's commutes to work, which will reduce congestion and make us richer. I will do everything I can to support this scheme and those promoting it.
"Essentially, most of Worcester's residents are the descendants of simple farm labourers who were displaced during the Industrial revolution and came to the city looking for menial work (which is tragically no longer available)." - @marrowman.

Haha, if I've ever an statement highlighting a poor education!

Most of us Brits are descendants of Neanderhals that were displaced as the geography and coast of Britain changed. It's incredible that some of us can actually operate these keyboards...
[quote][p][bold]Marrowman[/bold] wrote: I am saddened, but not unsurprised how closeted some of the viewpoints put forward are: it just proves to me the criticality of constructing Worcestershire Parkway to connect Worcestershire quickly to the outside world. I moved my business to Gloucester in 2007 - why? Mainly because the rail links were so poor and unreliable that I couldn't get to my clients in the west/east midland cities and London and the south-east easily. It actually made better sense for me to move south, as me and my colleagues can zip up to Brum from Cheltenham station in 40 minutes, or down to Bristol in the same amount of time. The road links make it easy to get to Heathrow and the South East, and the train journey is reliably just under 2 hours to central London, which is workable. I still live in Worcestershire (for now), but I'm now just one of the growing numbers of people heading south on the M5 to take part in Gloucestershire's booming economy. The reality is that Worcester (and to a lesser extent south Worcestershire) is not that great a place to do business. The transport links are slow and congested, there is a severe dearth of suitable employment office space and warehousing, and (in Worcester's case) the local population are under-skilled. Essentially, most of Worcester's residents are the descendants of simple farm labourers who were displaced during the Industrial revolution and came to the city looking for menial work (which is tragically no longer available). Those with qualifications/skill s either leave the city in search of work or commute out, causing congestion. Those who remain are under-skilled and poorly paid, which is why large parts of the city are made up of low-income council estates (Warndon, Ronkswood, Dines Green etc). If this city's fortunes are to change, we need to get these people upskilled and employed in wealth creating industries which pay well. The reality is that dualling the Southern Link Road (rather than duelling, which would involve picking a fight with it! ha ha) isn't going to solve Worcester's problems, as Brooksider says, it will just facilitate (mainly residential) development in Malvern and south/west Worcester, which will fill up the 'new' capacity and leave the city in the same state. Parkway makes sense – Worcestershire NEEDS better access to neighbouring markets if it wants to attract businesses here, create jobs and reduce local people's commutes to work, which will reduce congestion and make us richer. I will do everything I can to support this scheme and those promoting it.[/p][/quote]"Essentially, most of Worcester's residents are the descendants of simple farm labourers who were displaced during the Industrial revolution and came to the city looking for menial work (which is tragically no longer available)." - @marrowman. Haha, if I've ever an statement highlighting a poor education! Most of us Brits are descendants of Neanderhals that were displaced as the geography and coast of Britain changed. It's incredible that some of us can actually operate these keyboards... Small Town
  • Score: -2

11:05pm Tue 8 Jul 14

Casmal says...

WorcesterLad2000 wrote:
Casmal wrote:
CYNIC_AL wrote:
So a brand new station not actually in or close to the city centre? What a great idea! Does that mean even more buses clogging up our roads to ferry pepple into the city from Norton? Why not redevelop Shrub Hill as it's old, drab and in desperate need of a makeover.
And more cars clogging up the A4440, including, of course, the Carrington Bridge, to get to the station!!!
Thats why the £53m funding is dualling the carrington bridge - read the article properly!
Perhaps you would like to point out/quote where it says precisely that £53 will be allocated for dualling the bridge? All I can find is that only eight of the 50 proposed projects will go ahead and that the dualling of the Carrington Bridge, for which £64m is required, "remains uncertain."

The sums mentioned are:
£7.5m for the station
£4m for the Malvern Hills Science Park
£0.8m for vocational training
£2.4m for broadband
£5m for Kidderminster station
£4.3m for flood alleviation
£4m for Worcs. technology park
£1.1m for Kidderminster's link road

Oh, and £12m for enlarging the Norton roundabout and dualling the section to Whittington roundabout.

That leaves just over £9m!

I would dearly loved to be proved wrong, so look forward to your telling me where, exactly it says the £53m is for dualling the Carrington Bridge?
[quote][p][bold]WorcesterLad2000[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Casmal[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CYNIC_AL[/bold] wrote: So a brand new station not actually in or close to the city centre? What a great idea! Does that mean even more buses clogging up our roads to ferry pepple into the city from Norton? Why not redevelop Shrub Hill as it's old, drab and in desperate need of a makeover.[/p][/quote]And more cars clogging up the A4440, including, of course, the Carrington Bridge, to get to the station!!![/p][/quote]Thats why the £53m funding is dualling the carrington bridge - read the article properly![/p][/quote]Perhaps you would like to point out/quote where it says precisely that £53 will be allocated for dualling the bridge? All I can find is that only eight of the 50 proposed projects will go ahead and that the dualling of the Carrington Bridge, for which £64m is required, "remains uncertain." The sums mentioned are: £7.5m for the station £4m for the Malvern Hills Science Park £0.8m for vocational training £2.4m for broadband £5m for Kidderminster station £4.3m for flood alleviation £4m for Worcs. technology park £1.1m for Kidderminster's link road Oh, and £12m for enlarging the Norton roundabout and dualling the section to Whittington roundabout. That leaves just over £9m! I would dearly loved to be proved wrong, so look forward to your telling me where, exactly it says the £53m is for dualling the Carrington Bridge? Casmal
  • Score: 1

11:56pm Tue 8 Jul 14

Ex-St Johns says...

Maybe going a bit far to the future but Worcester, in the long term, cannot prosper by promoting its proximity to London or to Glasgow. Hamburg does not shout out about its closeness to Frankfurt or Munich. It shouts out about itself because it is a great city. As soon as Worcester gets a fast link to other cities, another city/ town will get even faster links. If the "Tri City Complex" of Worcester-Droitwich-
Malvern are connected within one economy that promotes all of the Tri-City's advantages of industry / innovation / culture / scenery then we needn't worry how quickly the rest of the country can get to Norton. We need a Tri-City where all the players in the economy can get to each other quickly and efficiently. The moment you start whoring yourself about your proximity to somewhere else you're doomed. Have you ever heard anyone promoting London because it's easy to get to Croydon?
Maybe going a bit far to the future but Worcester, in the long term, cannot prosper by promoting its proximity to London or to Glasgow. Hamburg does not shout out about its closeness to Frankfurt or Munich. It shouts out about itself because it is a great city. As soon as Worcester gets a fast link to other cities, another city/ town will get even faster links. If the "Tri City Complex" of Worcester-Droitwich- Malvern are connected within one economy that promotes all of the Tri-City's advantages of industry / innovation / culture / scenery then we needn't worry how quickly the rest of the country can get to Norton. We need a Tri-City where all the players in the economy can get to each other quickly and efficiently. The moment you start whoring yourself about your proximity to somewhere else you're doomed. Have you ever heard anyone promoting London because it's easy to get to Croydon? Ex-St Johns
  • Score: 2

12:50am Wed 9 Jul 14

Bonzodog says...

One thought: I hope that when they build the upper station ( on the Cotswolds line) that enough room is left for possible doubling of the track from Norton Junction to Evesham.
One thought: I hope that when they build the upper station ( on the Cotswolds line) that enough room is left for possible doubling of the track from Norton Junction to Evesham. Bonzodog
  • Score: 8

7:07am Wed 9 Jul 14

Jd-redditch says...

It is Worcestershire parkway not Worcester. Hopefully Worcester will get more visitors and commuters as a result with less cars travelling into the city. It will serve the wider County providing access to two railway lines; Birmingham - Bristol and Worcester - Oxford (and beyond). It's a great plan. Well done WCC.
It is Worcestershire parkway not Worcester. Hopefully Worcester will get more visitors and commuters as a result with less cars travelling into the city. It will serve the wider County providing access to two railway lines; Birmingham - Bristol and Worcester - Oxford (and beyond). It's a great plan. Well done WCC. Jd-redditch
  • Score: 7

8:13am Wed 9 Jul 14

Carthaginian says...

Well, I know that I am a descendant of low paid Worcestershire farm labourers and later mixed with Birmingham war evacuees (and am proud of them, 'cos I know what they have contributed to the City of Worcester over the centuries and decades ... try the National Education League and free schools independent of religious influence for a start, and then the various City War Memorials if that doesn't satisfy you) ...

Parkway has to be a station for Worcestershire and its environs, not for Worcester alone. Living west of the City, having to pass through Worcester en route to London (and frequently change) is tedious. Nearly an hour to get from Malvern to Gloucester by train? Bizarre.

An out of town car park will surely reduce road travel pressures within the City ... up the M5 to an out of town station actually sounds quite modern to the labourer descendants who aren't yet city-folk, but also inhabit Worcestershire.
Well, I know that I am a descendant of low paid Worcestershire farm labourers and later mixed with Birmingham war evacuees (and am proud of them, 'cos I know what they have contributed to the City of Worcester over the centuries and decades ... try the National Education League and free schools independent of religious influence for a start, and then the various City War Memorials if that doesn't satisfy you) ... Parkway has to be a station for Worcestershire and its environs, not for Worcester alone. Living west of the City, having to pass through Worcester en route to London (and frequently change) is tedious. Nearly an hour to get from Malvern to Gloucester by train? Bizarre. An out of town car park will surely reduce road travel pressures within the City ... up the M5 to an out of town station actually sounds quite modern to the labourer descendants who aren't yet city-folk, but also inhabit Worcestershire. Carthaginian
  • Score: 7

9:54am Wed 9 Jul 14

WorcesterLad2000 says...

THE FACTS wrote:
Jason White wrote:
Worcester Parkway will open up the city to destinations all over the UK without the need to change trains. This will offer a seismic shift in the right direction to transform rail travel in the county which has never been seen before. Shrub Hill has always been inadequate due to the nature of rail geography in the area. Cynics need to wise up and take the blinkers off in order to see the bigger picture. Well done to all those who have tirelessly worked to bring this project to a point where funding is now secured and I look forward to using the facility in the future. Jason White.
Anyone got the route stations what's the first 3 south stations and first 3 north stations?
Depends on some timetables but mainly: North: Birmingham New Street, Burton-on-Trent and Derby. South: Cheltenham, Bristol Parkway and Bristol Temple Meads.
[quote][p][bold]THE FACTS[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jason White[/bold] wrote: Worcester Parkway will open up the city to destinations all over the UK without the need to change trains. This will offer a seismic shift in the right direction to transform rail travel in the county which has never been seen before. Shrub Hill has always been inadequate due to the nature of rail geography in the area. Cynics need to wise up and take the blinkers off in order to see the bigger picture. Well done to all those who have tirelessly worked to bring this project to a point where funding is now secured and I look forward to using the facility in the future. Jason White.[/p][/quote]Anyone got the route stations what's the first 3 south stations and first 3 north stations?[/p][/quote]Depends on some timetables but mainly: North: Birmingham New Street, Burton-on-Trent and Derby. South: Cheltenham, Bristol Parkway and Bristol Temple Meads. WorcesterLad2000
  • Score: 0

3:22pm Wed 9 Jul 14

MJI says...

Small Town wrote:
Worcester Parkway - What a joke!

A city the size of Glasgow or Bristol benefits from the parkway concept because of the congestion such a larger conurbation as those suffers, a large market town like Worcester is incomparable and it will simply bring zero benefit.

The congestion in the Worcester even at peak times (8:15 - 9:10 and 16:35 - 17:30) could at the most be classed as variable, nothing at all like the near stand still rush hours in proper cities.

So, the parkway stop, great - just another to add to what feels like 20 odd stops between New Street and London Paddington. If they want to make REAL investment in improvement, then they improve lines to run a regular Express train service from Worcester to London, stopping only at Oxford. Now that would be progress.
It is not on the Cotswold line it will be on the Lickey route the old LMS main line from Bristol to Birmingham
[quote][p][bold]Small Town[/bold] wrote: Worcester Parkway - What a joke! A city the size of Glasgow or Bristol benefits from the parkway concept because of the congestion such a larger conurbation as those suffers, a large market town like Worcester is incomparable and it will simply bring zero benefit. The congestion in the Worcester even at peak times (8:15 - 9:10 and 16:35 - 17:30) could at the most be classed as variable, nothing at all like the near stand still rush hours in proper cities. So, the parkway stop, great - just another to add to what feels like 20 odd stops between New Street and London Paddington. If they want to make REAL investment in improvement, then they improve lines to run a regular Express train service from Worcester to London, stopping only at Oxford. Now that would be progress.[/p][/quote]It is not on the Cotswold line it will be on the Lickey route the old LMS main line from Bristol to Birmingham MJI
  • Score: 2

8:21pm Wed 9 Jul 14

WorcesterLad2000 says...

Casmal wrote:
WorcesterLad2000 wrote:
Casmal wrote:
CYNIC_AL wrote:
So a brand new station not actually in or close to the city centre? What a great idea! Does that mean even more buses clogging up our roads to ferry pepple into the city from Norton? Why not redevelop Shrub Hill as it's old, drab and in desperate need of a makeover.
And more cars clogging up the A4440, including, of course, the Carrington Bridge, to get to the station!!!
Thats why the £53m funding is dualling the carrington bridge - read the article properly!
Perhaps you would like to point out/quote where it says precisely that £53 will be allocated for dualling the bridge? All I can find is that only eight of the 50 proposed projects will go ahead and that the dualling of the Carrington Bridge, for which £64m is required, "remains uncertain."

The sums mentioned are:
£7.5m for the station
£4m for the Malvern Hills Science Park
£0.8m for vocational training
£2.4m for broadband
£5m for Kidderminster station
£4.3m for flood alleviation
£4m for Worcs. technology park
£1.1m for Kidderminster's link road

Oh, and £12m for enlarging the Norton roundabout and dualling the section to Whittington roundabout.

That leaves just over £9m!

I would dearly loved to be proved wrong, so look forward to your telling me where, exactly it says the £53m is for dualling the Carrington Bridge?
No the bit between the carrington bridge and whittington that there dualling at the moment

"...major changes to the A4440 Southern Link Road.

The money will allow Norton roundabout to be enlarged, and dual-track the section leading towards Whittington island, easing congestion along one of the city's most notorious routes."
[quote][p][bold]Casmal[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WorcesterLad2000[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Casmal[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CYNIC_AL[/bold] wrote: So a brand new station not actually in or close to the city centre? What a great idea! Does that mean even more buses clogging up our roads to ferry pepple into the city from Norton? Why not redevelop Shrub Hill as it's old, drab and in desperate need of a makeover.[/p][/quote]And more cars clogging up the A4440, including, of course, the Carrington Bridge, to get to the station!!![/p][/quote]Thats why the £53m funding is dualling the carrington bridge - read the article properly![/p][/quote]Perhaps you would like to point out/quote where it says precisely that £53 will be allocated for dualling the bridge? All I can find is that only eight of the 50 proposed projects will go ahead and that the dualling of the Carrington Bridge, for which £64m is required, "remains uncertain." The sums mentioned are: £7.5m for the station £4m for the Malvern Hills Science Park £0.8m for vocational training £2.4m for broadband £5m for Kidderminster station £4.3m for flood alleviation £4m for Worcs. technology park £1.1m for Kidderminster's link road Oh, and £12m for enlarging the Norton roundabout and dualling the section to Whittington roundabout. That leaves just over £9m! I would dearly loved to be proved wrong, so look forward to your telling me where, exactly it says the £53m is for dualling the Carrington Bridge?[/p][/quote]No the bit between the carrington bridge and whittington that there dualling at the moment "...major changes to the A4440 Southern Link Road. The money will allow Norton roundabout to be enlarged, and dual-track the section leading towards Whittington island, easing congestion along one of the city's most notorious routes." WorcesterLad2000
  • Score: 1

8:41pm Wed 9 Jul 14

Casmal says...

WorcesterLad2000 wrote:
Casmal wrote:
WorcesterLad2000 wrote:
Casmal wrote:
CYNIC_AL wrote:
So a brand new station not actually in or close to the city centre? What a great idea! Does that mean even more buses clogging up our roads to ferry pepple into the city from Norton? Why not redevelop Shrub Hill as it's old, drab and in desperate need of a makeover.
And more cars clogging up the A4440, including, of course, the Carrington Bridge, to get to the station!!!
Thats why the £53m funding is dualling the carrington bridge - read the article properly!
Perhaps you would like to point out/quote where it says precisely that £53 will be allocated for dualling the bridge? All I can find is that only eight of the 50 proposed projects will go ahead and that the dualling of the Carrington Bridge, for which £64m is required, "remains uncertain."

The sums mentioned are:
£7.5m for the station
£4m for the Malvern Hills Science Park
£0.8m for vocational training
£2.4m for broadband
£5m for Kidderminster station
£4.3m for flood alleviation
£4m for Worcs. technology park
£1.1m for Kidderminster's link road

Oh, and £12m for enlarging the Norton roundabout and dualling the section to Whittington roundabout.

That leaves just over £9m!

I would dearly loved to be proved wrong, so look forward to your telling me where, exactly it says the £53m is for dualling the Carrington Bridge?
No the bit between the carrington bridge and whittington that there dualling at the moment

"...major changes to the A4440 Southern Link Road.

The money will allow Norton roundabout to be enlarged, and dual-track the section leading towards Whittington island, easing congestion along one of the city's most notorious routes."
So, basically you were wrong to make the rather sarcastic comment that I should read the article properly!! And I was right, there is no money to dual the bridge! When the Conservatives in Malvern forced a revote on the SWDP and imposed a whip or three to ensure they reversed the democraric decision to approve an alternative plan, the Leader, David Hughes assured us the road infrastructure would be improved to deal with the many hundreds/thousands of new houses and residents.

Not for the first time his promise has proved hollow and we in Malvern will be gridlocked. A parkway station at Norton will do nothing to ease this gridlock and will doubtless add to it!! Dualling the rest of the A444o will be meaningless unless the bridge is dualled. Anyone who knows this route knows that this is the major cause of the problems. Yet the Government have decided dualling the bridge is not a priority. Total and utter madness.
[quote][p][bold]WorcesterLad2000[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Casmal[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WorcesterLad2000[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Casmal[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CYNIC_AL[/bold] wrote: So a brand new station not actually in or close to the city centre? What a great idea! Does that mean even more buses clogging up our roads to ferry pepple into the city from Norton? Why not redevelop Shrub Hill as it's old, drab and in desperate need of a makeover.[/p][/quote]And more cars clogging up the A4440, including, of course, the Carrington Bridge, to get to the station!!![/p][/quote]Thats why the £53m funding is dualling the carrington bridge - read the article properly![/p][/quote]Perhaps you would like to point out/quote where it says precisely that £53 will be allocated for dualling the bridge? All I can find is that only eight of the 50 proposed projects will go ahead and that the dualling of the Carrington Bridge, for which £64m is required, "remains uncertain." The sums mentioned are: £7.5m for the station £4m for the Malvern Hills Science Park £0.8m for vocational training £2.4m for broadband £5m for Kidderminster station £4.3m for flood alleviation £4m for Worcs. technology park £1.1m for Kidderminster's link road Oh, and £12m for enlarging the Norton roundabout and dualling the section to Whittington roundabout. That leaves just over £9m! I would dearly loved to be proved wrong, so look forward to your telling me where, exactly it says the £53m is for dualling the Carrington Bridge?[/p][/quote]No the bit between the carrington bridge and whittington that there dualling at the moment "...major changes to the A4440 Southern Link Road. The money will allow Norton roundabout to be enlarged, and dual-track the section leading towards Whittington island, easing congestion along one of the city's most notorious routes."[/p][/quote]So, basically you were wrong to make the rather sarcastic comment that I should read the article properly!! And I was right, there is no money to dual the bridge! When the Conservatives in Malvern forced a revote on the SWDP and imposed a whip or three to ensure they reversed the democraric decision to approve an alternative plan, the Leader, David Hughes assured us the road infrastructure would be improved to deal with the many hundreds/thousands of new houses and residents. Not for the first time his promise has proved hollow and we in Malvern will be gridlocked. A parkway station at Norton will do nothing to ease this gridlock and will doubtless add to it!! Dualling the rest of the A444o will be meaningless unless the bridge is dualled. Anyone who knows this route knows that this is the major cause of the problems. Yet the Government have decided dualling the bridge is not a priority. Total and utter madness. Casmal
  • Score: 7

9:00pm Wed 9 Jul 14

WorcesterLad2000 says...

Jason White wrote:
Marrowman has hit the nail squarely on the head with his comments. Whilst towns and cities such as Cheltenham, Gloucester, Birmingham and Bristol have forged ahead with new development and finance to enhance and grow their economies, Worcester has been punching below its weight for decades. Worcester Parkway will be a vital tool to thrust the city into the fast lane of business and tourism markets and we can finally start playing on a level field with our competitors. So if you want Worcester to be a successful and prosperous place to live, work and visit, get behind the Parkway project. If you don't then put your head back in the sand.
100 % Agree!! Best comment so far, hopefully everyone in Worcester reads this :)
[quote][p][bold]Jason White[/bold] wrote: Marrowman has hit the nail squarely on the head with his comments. Whilst towns and cities such as Cheltenham, Gloucester, Birmingham and Bristol have forged ahead with new development and finance to enhance and grow their economies, Worcester has been punching below its weight for decades. Worcester Parkway will be a vital tool to thrust the city into the fast lane of business and tourism markets and we can finally start playing on a level field with our competitors. So if you want Worcester to be a successful and prosperous place to live, work and visit, get behind the Parkway project. If you don't then put your head back in the sand.[/p][/quote]100 % Agree!! Best comment so far, hopefully everyone in Worcester reads this :) WorcesterLad2000
  • Score: 3

9:03pm Wed 9 Jul 14

WorcesterLad2000 says...

Jason White wrote:
Worcester Parkway will open up the city to destinations all over the UK without the need to change trains. This will offer a seismic shift in the right direction to transform rail travel in the county which has never been seen before. Shrub Hill has always been inadequate due to the nature of rail geography in the area. Cynics need to wise up and take the blinkers off in order to see the bigger picture. Well done to all those who have tirelessly worked to bring this project to a point where funding is now secured and I look forward to using the facility in the future. Jason White.
100 % Agree!
[quote][p][bold]Jason White[/bold] wrote: Worcester Parkway will open up the city to destinations all over the UK without the need to change trains. This will offer a seismic shift in the right direction to transform rail travel in the county which has never been seen before. Shrub Hill has always been inadequate due to the nature of rail geography in the area. Cynics need to wise up and take the blinkers off in order to see the bigger picture. Well done to all those who have tirelessly worked to bring this project to a point where funding is now secured and I look forward to using the facility in the future. Jason White.[/p][/quote]100 % Agree! WorcesterLad2000
  • Score: -1

9:04pm Wed 9 Jul 14

WorcesterLad2000 says...

The funny thing is that WCC have just got rid of the Park & Ride sites but the parkway will act as another park & ride just by train instead of bus.
The funny thing is that WCC have just got rid of the Park & Ride sites but the parkway will act as another park & ride just by train instead of bus. WorcesterLad2000
  • Score: 4

10:45pm Wed 9 Jul 14

brooksider says...

WorcesterLad2000 wrote:
Jason White wrote:
Marrowman has hit the nail squarely on the head with his comments. Whilst towns and cities such as Cheltenham, Gloucester, Birmingham and Bristol have forged ahead with new development and finance to enhance and grow their economies, Worcester has been punching below its weight for decades. Worcester Parkway will be a vital tool to thrust the city into the fast lane of business and tourism markets and we can finally start playing on a level field with our competitors. So if you want Worcester to be a successful and prosperous place to live, work and visit, get behind the Parkway project. If you don't then put your head back in the sand.
100 % Agree!! Best comment so far, hopefully everyone in Worcester reads this :)
Worcester Parkway will only be 'a vital tool' when Cross Country trains stop there, there is no agreement in place at the moment, and the Cotswold line is dual tracked.

Despite Geraghty's claim that the station will be operating in 2016, this will only be on the London line and not on the fast Bristol to Birmingham track.

Worcester's economic problems will not be resolved until the is a change at the top at Worcestershire County Council.
[quote][p][bold]WorcesterLad2000[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jason White[/bold] wrote: Marrowman has hit the nail squarely on the head with his comments. Whilst towns and cities such as Cheltenham, Gloucester, Birmingham and Bristol have forged ahead with new development and finance to enhance and grow their economies, Worcester has been punching below its weight for decades. Worcester Parkway will be a vital tool to thrust the city into the fast lane of business and tourism markets and we can finally start playing on a level field with our competitors. So if you want Worcester to be a successful and prosperous place to live, work and visit, get behind the Parkway project. If you don't then put your head back in the sand.[/p][/quote]100 % Agree!! Best comment so far, hopefully everyone in Worcester reads this :)[/p][/quote]Worcester Parkway will only be 'a vital tool' when Cross Country trains stop there, there is no agreement in place at the moment, and the Cotswold line is dual tracked. Despite Geraghty's claim that the station will be operating in 2016, this will only be on the London line and not on the fast Bristol to Birmingham track. Worcester's economic problems will not be resolved until the is a change at the top at Worcestershire County Council. brooksider
  • Score: 5

11:19pm Wed 9 Jul 14

Small Town says...

brooksider wrote:
WorcesterLad2000 wrote:
Jason White wrote:
Marrowman has hit the nail squarely on the head with his comments. Whilst towns and cities such as Cheltenham, Gloucester, Birmingham and Bristol have forged ahead with new development and finance to enhance and grow their economies, Worcester has been punching below its weight for decades. Worcester Parkway will be a vital tool to thrust the city into the fast lane of business and tourism markets and we can finally start playing on a level field with our competitors. So if you want Worcester to be a successful and prosperous place to live, work and visit, get behind the Parkway project. If you don't then put your head back in the sand.
100 % Agree!! Best comment so far, hopefully everyone in Worcester reads this :)
Worcester Parkway will only be 'a vital tool' when Cross Country trains stop there, there is no agreement in place at the moment, and the Cotswold line is dual tracked.

Despite Geraghty's claim that the station will be operating in 2016, this will only be on the London line and not on the fast Bristol to Birmingham track.

Worcester's economic problems will not be resolved until the is a change at the top at Worcestershire County Council.
How on this earth will a change at the top of Worcestershire County Council resolve the area's (supposed) economic 'problems'?

Do you not think that the county council has the area's economic interests at its heart already... What a very odd post?

- Please explain!?
[quote][p][bold]brooksider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WorcesterLad2000[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jason White[/bold] wrote: Marrowman has hit the nail squarely on the head with his comments. Whilst towns and cities such as Cheltenham, Gloucester, Birmingham and Bristol have forged ahead with new development and finance to enhance and grow their economies, Worcester has been punching below its weight for decades. Worcester Parkway will be a vital tool to thrust the city into the fast lane of business and tourism markets and we can finally start playing on a level field with our competitors. So if you want Worcester to be a successful and prosperous place to live, work and visit, get behind the Parkway project. If you don't then put your head back in the sand.[/p][/quote]100 % Agree!! Best comment so far, hopefully everyone in Worcester reads this :)[/p][/quote]Worcester Parkway will only be 'a vital tool' when Cross Country trains stop there, there is no agreement in place at the moment, and the Cotswold line is dual tracked. Despite Geraghty's claim that the station will be operating in 2016, this will only be on the London line and not on the fast Bristol to Birmingham track. Worcester's economic problems will not be resolved until the is a change at the top at Worcestershire County Council.[/p][/quote]How on this earth will a change at the top of Worcestershire County Council resolve the area's (supposed) economic 'problems'? Do you not think that the county council has the area's economic interests at its heart already... What a very odd post? - Please explain!? Small Town
  • Score: -3

12:35am Thu 10 Jul 14

brooksider says...

If I need to explain it, you will not understand.
If I need to explain it, you will not understand. brooksider
  • Score: -1

9:07am Thu 10 Jul 14

WorcesterLad2000 says...

Casmal wrote:
WorcesterLad2000 wrote:
Casmal wrote:
WorcesterLad2000 wrote:
Casmal wrote:
CYNIC_AL wrote:
So a brand new station not actually in or close to the city centre? What a great idea! Does that mean even more buses clogging up our roads to ferry pepple into the city from Norton? Why not redevelop Shrub Hill as it's old, drab and in desperate need of a makeover.
And more cars clogging up the A4440, including, of course, the Carrington Bridge, to get to the station!!!
Thats why the £53m funding is dualling the carrington bridge - read the article properly!
Perhaps you would like to point out/quote where it says precisely that £53 will be allocated for dualling the bridge? All I can find is that only eight of the 50 proposed projects will go ahead and that the dualling of the Carrington Bridge, for which £64m is required, "remains uncertain."

The sums mentioned are:
£7.5m for the station
£4m for the Malvern Hills Science Park
£0.8m for vocational training
£2.4m for broadband
£5m for Kidderminster station
£4.3m for flood alleviation
£4m for Worcs. technology park
£1.1m for Kidderminster's link road

Oh, and £12m for enlarging the Norton roundabout and dualling the section to Whittington roundabout.

That leaves just over £9m!

I would dearly loved to be proved wrong, so look forward to your telling me where, exactly it says the £53m is for dualling the Carrington Bridge?
No the bit between the carrington bridge and whittington that there dualling at the moment

"...major changes to the A4440 Southern Link Road.

The money will allow Norton roundabout to be enlarged, and dual-track the section leading towards Whittington island, easing congestion along one of the city's most notorious routes."
So, basically you were wrong to make the rather sarcastic comment that I should read the article properly!! And I was right, there is no money to dual the bridge! When the Conservatives in Malvern forced a revote on the SWDP and imposed a whip or three to ensure they reversed the democraric decision to approve an alternative plan, the Leader, David Hughes assured us the road infrastructure would be improved to deal with the many hundreds/thousands of new houses and residents.

Not for the first time his promise has proved hollow and we in Malvern will be gridlocked. A parkway station at Norton will do nothing to ease this gridlock and will doubtless add to it!! Dualling the rest of the A444o will be meaningless unless the bridge is dualled. Anyone who knows this route knows that this is the major cause of the problems. Yet the Government have decided dualling the bridge is not a priority. Total and utter madness.
Why don't you just get the train from Malvern to the Parkway, and if everyone did that there would be less people using the bridge! Why will parkway add to the amount of traffic? Will there suddenly be an extra 10,000 people in Malvern when the parkway is complete? If people currently drive to Warwick Parkway or Cheltenham they have to drive over the bridge to the motorway, then they'll either be the same amount of people doing that as they are now to get to Norton, or there'll be less people if they get the London PAD (cotswold line train) to the parkway and change.
[quote][p][bold]Casmal[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WorcesterLad2000[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Casmal[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WorcesterLad2000[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Casmal[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CYNIC_AL[/bold] wrote: So a brand new station not actually in or close to the city centre? What a great idea! Does that mean even more buses clogging up our roads to ferry pepple into the city from Norton? Why not redevelop Shrub Hill as it's old, drab and in desperate need of a makeover.[/p][/quote]And more cars clogging up the A4440, including, of course, the Carrington Bridge, to get to the station!!![/p][/quote]Thats why the £53m funding is dualling the carrington bridge - read the article properly![/p][/quote]Perhaps you would like to point out/quote where it says precisely that £53 will be allocated for dualling the bridge? All I can find is that only eight of the 50 proposed projects will go ahead and that the dualling of the Carrington Bridge, for which £64m is required, "remains uncertain." The sums mentioned are: £7.5m for the station £4m for the Malvern Hills Science Park £0.8m for vocational training £2.4m for broadband £5m for Kidderminster station £4.3m for flood alleviation £4m for Worcs. technology park £1.1m for Kidderminster's link road Oh, and £12m for enlarging the Norton roundabout and dualling the section to Whittington roundabout. That leaves just over £9m! I would dearly loved to be proved wrong, so look forward to your telling me where, exactly it says the £53m is for dualling the Carrington Bridge?[/p][/quote]No the bit between the carrington bridge and whittington that there dualling at the moment "...major changes to the A4440 Southern Link Road. The money will allow Norton roundabout to be enlarged, and dual-track the section leading towards Whittington island, easing congestion along one of the city's most notorious routes."[/p][/quote]So, basically you were wrong to make the rather sarcastic comment that I should read the article properly!! And I was right, there is no money to dual the bridge! When the Conservatives in Malvern forced a revote on the SWDP and imposed a whip or three to ensure they reversed the democraric decision to approve an alternative plan, the Leader, David Hughes assured us the road infrastructure would be improved to deal with the many hundreds/thousands of new houses and residents. Not for the first time his promise has proved hollow and we in Malvern will be gridlocked. A parkway station at Norton will do nothing to ease this gridlock and will doubtless add to it!! Dualling the rest of the A444o will be meaningless unless the bridge is dualled. Anyone who knows this route knows that this is the major cause of the problems. Yet the Government have decided dualling the bridge is not a priority. Total and utter madness.[/p][/quote]Why don't you just get the train from Malvern to the Parkway, and if everyone did that there would be less people using the bridge! Why will parkway add to the amount of traffic? Will there suddenly be an extra 10,000 people in Malvern when the parkway is complete? If people currently drive to Warwick Parkway or Cheltenham they have to drive over the bridge to the motorway, then they'll either be the same amount of people doing that as they are now to get to Norton, or there'll be less people if they get the London PAD (cotswold line train) to the parkway and change. WorcesterLad2000
  • Score: -1

9:38am Thu 10 Jul 14

thesquirrel says...

If the Worcestershire Parkway brings an express service to London, stopping only at Oxford and Reading and bringing the journey time down to less than 2 hours, then I'm all for it. Otherwise all it will do for me is add another stop to an already tedious journey. I frequently travel to London and get a taxi from home to the station.

Where people speak of the local rail geography, I would have thought it would make more sense to close Foregate St rather than Shrub Hill. Shrub Hill has parking, is a lot easier for drop offs and could be quite imposing sat on the hill as it is - if Elgar House got out of the way. Shrub has a café and a fantastic Victorian tiled waiting room that is being renovated. The platform at Foregate is only long enough to take half a train. whereas everything fits on the platform at Shrub. Let's get rid of Foregate I say, if Worcestershire Parkway goes ahead.
If the Worcestershire Parkway brings an express service to London, stopping only at Oxford and Reading and bringing the journey time down to less than 2 hours, then I'm all for it. Otherwise all it will do for me is add another stop to an already tedious journey. I frequently travel to London and get a taxi from home to the station. Where people speak of the local rail geography, I would have thought it would make more sense to close Foregate St rather than Shrub Hill. Shrub Hill has parking, is a lot easier for drop offs and could be quite imposing sat on the hill as it is - if Elgar House got out of the way. Shrub has a café and a fantastic Victorian tiled waiting room that is being renovated. The platform at Foregate is only long enough to take half a train. whereas everything fits on the platform at Shrub. Let's get rid of Foregate I say, if Worcestershire Parkway goes ahead. thesquirrel
  • Score: 1

10:02am Thu 10 Jul 14

Casmal says...

Not sure I follow that, either grammatically or logically. If people are going to use this station they will have to get to it. There is a clue in the name parkway! And yes, so much housing is proposed for Malvern, particularly at Newland and along the A449 and A4440 there will be significantly more people driving that route!

That route is a key route, which is already gridlocked, especially at certain times of the day, and the volume of traffic is getting worse. Yes, in an ideal world people will use public transport, but we are living in the real world - a world where people will drive to Great Malvern Station to park for free, rather than pay the parking charges at Malvern Link! There are also disabled people and people with conditions that prevent them from using public transport.

Quite how the Government thinks that this traffic bottleneck will not affect business and enterprise and therefore dualling the whole if it is not a priority is beyond me. As has been said, there has been some serious failure on the part of politicians, both local and national to get this message across.
Not sure I follow that, either grammatically or logically. If people are going to use this station they will have to get to it. There is a clue in the name parkway! And yes, so much housing is proposed for Malvern, particularly at Newland and along the A449 and A4440 there will be significantly more people driving that route! That route is a key route, which is already gridlocked, especially at certain times of the day, and the volume of traffic is getting worse. Yes, in an ideal world people will use public transport, but we are living in the real world - a world where people will drive to Great Malvern Station to park for free, rather than pay the parking charges at Malvern Link! There are also disabled people and people with conditions that prevent them from using public transport. Quite how the Government thinks that this traffic bottleneck will not affect business and enterprise and therefore dualling the whole if it is not a priority is beyond me. As has been said, there has been some serious failure on the part of politicians, both local and national to get this message across. Casmal
  • Score: 1

10:04am Thu 10 Jul 14

Casmal says...

Casmal wrote:
Not sure I follow that, either grammatically or logically. If people are going to use this station they will have to get to it. There is a clue in the name parkway! And yes, so much housing is proposed for Malvern, particularly at Newland and along the A449 and A4440 there will be significantly more people driving that route!

That route is a key route, which is already gridlocked, especially at certain times of the day, and the volume of traffic is getting worse. Yes, in an ideal world people will use public transport, but we are living in the real world - a world where people will drive to Great Malvern Station to park for free, rather than pay the parking charges at Malvern Link! There are also disabled people and people with conditions that prevent them from using public transport.

Quite how the Government thinks that this traffic bottleneck will not affect business and enterprise and therefore dualling the whole if it is not a priority is beyond me. As has been said, there has been some serious failure on the part of politicians, both local and national to get this message across.
Sorry, this was mean to be a response to WorcesterLad2000!
[quote][p][bold]Casmal[/bold] wrote: Not sure I follow that, either grammatically or logically. If people are going to use this station they will have to get to it. There is a clue in the name parkway! And yes, so much housing is proposed for Malvern, particularly at Newland and along the A449 and A4440 there will be significantly more people driving that route! That route is a key route, which is already gridlocked, especially at certain times of the day, and the volume of traffic is getting worse. Yes, in an ideal world people will use public transport, but we are living in the real world - a world where people will drive to Great Malvern Station to park for free, rather than pay the parking charges at Malvern Link! There are also disabled people and people with conditions that prevent them from using public transport. Quite how the Government thinks that this traffic bottleneck will not affect business and enterprise and therefore dualling the whole if it is not a priority is beyond me. As has been said, there has been some serious failure on the part of politicians, both local and national to get this message across.[/p][/quote]Sorry, this was mean to be a response to WorcesterLad2000! Casmal
  • Score: 0

3:52pm Thu 10 Jul 14

Ex-St Johns says...

thesquirrel wrote:
If the Worcestershire Parkway brings an express service to London, stopping only at Oxford and Reading and bringing the journey time down to less than 2 hours, then I'm all for it. Otherwise all it will do for me is add another stop to an already tedious journey. I frequently travel to London and get a taxi from home to the station.

Where people speak of the local rail geography, I would have thought it would make more sense to close Foregate St rather than Shrub Hill. Shrub Hill has parking, is a lot easier for drop offs and could be quite imposing sat on the hill as it is - if Elgar House got out of the way. Shrub has a café and a fantastic Victorian tiled waiting room that is being renovated. The platform at Foregate is only long enough to take half a train. whereas everything fits on the platform at Shrub. Let's get rid of Foregate I say, if Worcestershire Parkway goes ahead.
Let's keep 'em both I say. If Parkway is to bring people into the city then passengers will need to be able to change trains at Parkway and get on to a train to the centre. Foregate Street is in the centre. Keep Shrub Hill as well. A large part of the population can walk to it. If you build Parkway, but then close one or both of the stations within the city, you are actually reducing public transport connectivity not increasing it. If a person has no access to a car they will have to rely on a lift or taxi ride to Parkway - more expense, more hassle, more traffic.

One more thing - I assume that Worcester City Council, Wychavon District Council or Worcestershire County Council own the land around Parkway because the rents they could charge for the new business parks that would be built around it could generate cash for public services. It would be annoying if a private landowner makes a killing out of all this while those without a car have their access to travel further reduced.
[quote][p][bold]thesquirrel[/bold] wrote: If the Worcestershire Parkway brings an express service to London, stopping only at Oxford and Reading and bringing the journey time down to less than 2 hours, then I'm all for it. Otherwise all it will do for me is add another stop to an already tedious journey. I frequently travel to London and get a taxi from home to the station. Where people speak of the local rail geography, I would have thought it would make more sense to close Foregate St rather than Shrub Hill. Shrub Hill has parking, is a lot easier for drop offs and could be quite imposing sat on the hill as it is - if Elgar House got out of the way. Shrub has a café and a fantastic Victorian tiled waiting room that is being renovated. The platform at Foregate is only long enough to take half a train. whereas everything fits on the platform at Shrub. Let's get rid of Foregate I say, if Worcestershire Parkway goes ahead.[/p][/quote]Let's keep 'em both I say. If Parkway is to bring people into the city then passengers will need to be able to change trains at Parkway and get on to a train to the centre. Foregate Street is in the centre. Keep Shrub Hill as well. A large part of the population can walk to it. If you build Parkway, but then close one or both of the stations within the city, you are actually reducing public transport connectivity not increasing it. If a person has no access to a car they will have to rely on a lift or taxi ride to Parkway - more expense, more hassle, more traffic. One more thing - I assume that Worcester City Council, Wychavon District Council or Worcestershire County Council own the land around Parkway because the rents they could charge for the new business parks that would be built around it could generate cash for public services. It would be annoying if a private landowner makes a killing out of all this while those without a car have their access to travel further reduced. Ex-St Johns
  • Score: 3

5:49pm Thu 10 Jul 14

brooksider says...

Ex-St Johns wrote:
thesquirrel wrote:
If the Worcestershire Parkway brings an express service to London, stopping only at Oxford and Reading and bringing the journey time down to less than 2 hours, then I'm all for it. Otherwise all it will do for me is add another stop to an already tedious journey. I frequently travel to London and get a taxi from home to the station.

Where people speak of the local rail geography, I would have thought it would make more sense to close Foregate St rather than Shrub Hill. Shrub Hill has parking, is a lot easier for drop offs and could be quite imposing sat on the hill as it is - if Elgar House got out of the way. Shrub has a café and a fantastic Victorian tiled waiting room that is being renovated. The platform at Foregate is only long enough to take half a train. whereas everything fits on the platform at Shrub. Let's get rid of Foregate I say, if Worcestershire Parkway goes ahead.
Let's keep 'em both I say. If Parkway is to bring people into the city then passengers will need to be able to change trains at Parkway and get on to a train to the centre. Foregate Street is in the centre. Keep Shrub Hill as well. A large part of the population can walk to it. If you build Parkway, but then close one or both of the stations within the city, you are actually reducing public transport connectivity not increasing it. If a person has no access to a car they will have to rely on a lift or taxi ride to Parkway - more expense, more hassle, more traffic.

One more thing - I assume that Worcester City Council, Wychavon District Council or Worcestershire County Council own the land around Parkway because the rents they could charge for the new business parks that would be built around it could generate cash for public services. It would be annoying if a private landowner makes a killing out of all this while those without a car have their access to travel further reduced.
I think the land is owned by a Stennard Harrison company.
[quote][p][bold]Ex-St Johns[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thesquirrel[/bold] wrote: If the Worcestershire Parkway brings an express service to London, stopping only at Oxford and Reading and bringing the journey time down to less than 2 hours, then I'm all for it. Otherwise all it will do for me is add another stop to an already tedious journey. I frequently travel to London and get a taxi from home to the station. Where people speak of the local rail geography, I would have thought it would make more sense to close Foregate St rather than Shrub Hill. Shrub Hill has parking, is a lot easier for drop offs and could be quite imposing sat on the hill as it is - if Elgar House got out of the way. Shrub has a café and a fantastic Victorian tiled waiting room that is being renovated. The platform at Foregate is only long enough to take half a train. whereas everything fits on the platform at Shrub. Let's get rid of Foregate I say, if Worcestershire Parkway goes ahead.[/p][/quote]Let's keep 'em both I say. If Parkway is to bring people into the city then passengers will need to be able to change trains at Parkway and get on to a train to the centre. Foregate Street is in the centre. Keep Shrub Hill as well. A large part of the population can walk to it. If you build Parkway, but then close one or both of the stations within the city, you are actually reducing public transport connectivity not increasing it. If a person has no access to a car they will have to rely on a lift or taxi ride to Parkway - more expense, more hassle, more traffic. One more thing - I assume that Worcester City Council, Wychavon District Council or Worcestershire County Council own the land around Parkway because the rents they could charge for the new business parks that would be built around it could generate cash for public services. It would be annoying if a private landowner makes a killing out of all this while those without a car have their access to travel further reduced.[/p][/quote]I think the land is owned by a Stennard Harrison company. brooksider
  • Score: 0

5:35pm Sat 12 Jul 14

WorcesterLad2000 says...

Ex-St Johns wrote:
thesquirrel wrote:
If the Worcestershire Parkway brings an express service to London, stopping only at Oxford and Reading and bringing the journey time down to less than 2 hours, then I'm all for it. Otherwise all it will do for me is add another stop to an already tedious journey. I frequently travel to London and get a taxi from home to the station.

Where people speak of the local rail geography, I would have thought it would make more sense to close Foregate St rather than Shrub Hill. Shrub Hill has parking, is a lot easier for drop offs and could be quite imposing sat on the hill as it is - if Elgar House got out of the way. Shrub has a café and a fantastic Victorian tiled waiting room that is being renovated. The platform at Foregate is only long enough to take half a train. whereas everything fits on the platform at Shrub. Let's get rid of Foregate I say, if Worcestershire Parkway goes ahead.
Let's keep 'em both I say. If Parkway is to bring people into the city then passengers will need to be able to change trains at Parkway and get on to a train to the centre. Foregate Street is in the centre. Keep Shrub Hill as well. A large part of the population can walk to it. If you build Parkway, but then close one or both of the stations within the city, you are actually reducing public transport connectivity not increasing it. If a person has no access to a car they will have to rely on a lift or taxi ride to Parkway - more expense, more hassle, more traffic.

One more thing - I assume that Worcester City Council, Wychavon District Council or Worcestershire County Council own the land around Parkway because the rents they could charge for the new business parks that would be built around it could generate cash for public services. It would be annoying if a private landowner makes a killing out of all this while those without a car have their access to travel further reduced.
If you close Foregate St we will loose all of our trains to Birmingham. It means there won't be trains to Droitwich Spa and no trains to Moor Street orSolihull/Dorridge meaning we can't get to Kidderminster (& other places) - so reducing connectivity. And foregate street is nearer many more bus routes so making it easy for people to get to it. Yes I understand we will have trains to New Street on the Cross Country line but we may only one an hour with Nottingham - Cardiff services (Phase 2), when we get other services we will have 3 services to Birmingham every hour and add this to the ones from Foregate St there'll be 6 trains an hour to Birmingham from Worcester. There's a cafe at Foregate Street anyway!
[quote][p][bold]Ex-St Johns[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thesquirrel[/bold] wrote: If the Worcestershire Parkway brings an express service to London, stopping only at Oxford and Reading and bringing the journey time down to less than 2 hours, then I'm all for it. Otherwise all it will do for me is add another stop to an already tedious journey. I frequently travel to London and get a taxi from home to the station. Where people speak of the local rail geography, I would have thought it would make more sense to close Foregate St rather than Shrub Hill. Shrub Hill has parking, is a lot easier for drop offs and could be quite imposing sat on the hill as it is - if Elgar House got out of the way. Shrub has a café and a fantastic Victorian tiled waiting room that is being renovated. The platform at Foregate is only long enough to take half a train. whereas everything fits on the platform at Shrub. Let's get rid of Foregate I say, if Worcestershire Parkway goes ahead.[/p][/quote]Let's keep 'em both I say. If Parkway is to bring people into the city then passengers will need to be able to change trains at Parkway and get on to a train to the centre. Foregate Street is in the centre. Keep Shrub Hill as well. A large part of the population can walk to it. If you build Parkway, but then close one or both of the stations within the city, you are actually reducing public transport connectivity not increasing it. If a person has no access to a car they will have to rely on a lift or taxi ride to Parkway - more expense, more hassle, more traffic. One more thing - I assume that Worcester City Council, Wychavon District Council or Worcestershire County Council own the land around Parkway because the rents they could charge for the new business parks that would be built around it could generate cash for public services. It would be annoying if a private landowner makes a killing out of all this while those without a car have their access to travel further reduced.[/p][/quote]If you close Foregate St we will loose all of our trains to Birmingham. It means there won't be trains to Droitwich Spa and no trains to Moor Street orSolihull/Dorridge meaning we can't get to Kidderminster (& other places) - so reducing connectivity. And foregate street is nearer many more bus routes so making it easy for people to get to it. Yes I understand we will have trains to New Street on the Cross Country line but we may only one an hour with Nottingham - Cardiff services (Phase 2), when we get other services we will have 3 services to Birmingham every hour and add this to the ones from Foregate St there'll be 6 trains an hour to Birmingham from Worcester. There's a cafe at Foregate Street anyway! WorcesterLad2000
  • Score: 1

3:37pm Mon 14 Jul 14

trundle says...

Marrowman wrote:
I am saddened, but not unsurprised how closeted some of the viewpoints put forward are: it just proves to me the criticality of constructing Worcestershire Parkway to connect Worcestershire quickly to the outside world. I moved my business to Gloucester in 2007 - why? Mainly because the rail links were so poor and unreliable that I couldn't get to my clients in the west/east midland cities and London and the south-east easily. It actually made better sense for me to move south, as me and my colleagues can zip up to Brum from Cheltenham station in 40 minutes, or down to Bristol in the same amount of time. The road links make it easy to get to Heathrow and the South East, and the train journey is reliably just under 2 hours to central London, which is workable.

I still live in Worcestershire (for now), but I'm now just one of the growing numbers of people heading south on the M5 to take part in Gloucestershire's booming economy. The reality is that Worcester (and to a lesser extent south Worcestershire) is not that great a place to do business. The transport links are slow and congested, there is a severe dearth of suitable employment office space and warehousing, and (in Worcester's case) the local population are under-skilled.

Essentially, most of Worcester's residents are the descendants of simple farm labourers who were displaced during the Industrial revolution and came to the city looking for menial work (which is tragically no longer available). Those with qualifications/skill

s either leave the city in search of work or commute out, causing congestion. Those who remain are under-skilled and poorly paid, which is why large parts of the city are made up of low-income council estates (Warndon, Ronkswood, Dines Green etc). If this city's fortunes are to change, we need to get these people upskilled and employed in wealth creating industries which pay well.

The reality is that dualling the Southern Link Road (rather than duelling, which would involve picking a fight with it! ha ha) isn't going to solve Worcester's problems, as Brooksider says, it will just facilitate (mainly residential) development in Malvern and south/west Worcester, which will fill up the 'new' capacity and leave the city in the same state.

Parkway makes sense – Worcestershire NEEDS better access to neighbouring markets if it wants to attract businesses here, create jobs and reduce local people's commutes to work, which will reduce congestion and make us richer. I will do everything I can to support this scheme and those promoting it.
Well Gloucestershire can have all the rail links, because having visited Gloucester recently I commented on how busy it was, and how many industrial estates dotted everywhere we cam accross. It's unattractive, and although Worcester isn't much better I really hope it does not go the same way. Why does everywhere have to have huge roads and booming economies? We'll lose the charm of Worcestershire if we connect it up too much so hopefully the parkway is a long way off yet!
[quote][p][bold]Marrowman[/bold] wrote: I am saddened, but not unsurprised how closeted some of the viewpoints put forward are: it just proves to me the criticality of constructing Worcestershire Parkway to connect Worcestershire quickly to the outside world. I moved my business to Gloucester in 2007 - why? Mainly because the rail links were so poor and unreliable that I couldn't get to my clients in the west/east midland cities and London and the south-east easily. It actually made better sense for me to move south, as me and my colleagues can zip up to Brum from Cheltenham station in 40 minutes, or down to Bristol in the same amount of time. The road links make it easy to get to Heathrow and the South East, and the train journey is reliably just under 2 hours to central London, which is workable. I still live in Worcestershire (for now), but I'm now just one of the growing numbers of people heading south on the M5 to take part in Gloucestershire's booming economy. The reality is that Worcester (and to a lesser extent south Worcestershire) is not that great a place to do business. The transport links are slow and congested, there is a severe dearth of suitable employment office space and warehousing, and (in Worcester's case) the local population are under-skilled. Essentially, most of Worcester's residents are the descendants of simple farm labourers who were displaced during the Industrial revolution and came to the city looking for menial work (which is tragically no longer available). Those with qualifications/skill s either leave the city in search of work or commute out, causing congestion. Those who remain are under-skilled and poorly paid, which is why large parts of the city are made up of low-income council estates (Warndon, Ronkswood, Dines Green etc). If this city's fortunes are to change, we need to get these people upskilled and employed in wealth creating industries which pay well. The reality is that dualling the Southern Link Road (rather than duelling, which would involve picking a fight with it! ha ha) isn't going to solve Worcester's problems, as Brooksider says, it will just facilitate (mainly residential) development in Malvern and south/west Worcester, which will fill up the 'new' capacity and leave the city in the same state. Parkway makes sense – Worcestershire NEEDS better access to neighbouring markets if it wants to attract businesses here, create jobs and reduce local people's commutes to work, which will reduce congestion and make us richer. I will do everything I can to support this scheme and those promoting it.[/p][/quote]Well Gloucestershire can have all the rail links, because having visited Gloucester recently I commented on how busy it was, and how many industrial estates dotted everywhere we cam accross. It's unattractive, and although Worcester isn't much better I really hope it does not go the same way. Why does everywhere have to have huge roads and booming economies? We'll lose the charm of Worcestershire if we connect it up too much so hopefully the parkway is a long way off yet! trundle
  • Score: 2

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree