A trial park and ride that ran for seven days in the summer was used by more than 200 people a day and cost £52,000 to operate.
Brighton and Hove City Council trialled the service as an experiment over the first three weekends of August and the Sunday and Monday of the bank holiday weekend from Sussex University’s campus in Falmer.
The busiest of the seven days was Monday 25 August, the bank holiday, when 347 people used the dedicated bus service which ran four buses an hour from 9am to 9pm.
In a written answer to Green councillor Pete West, who asked about the costs and whether the scheme was value for money, Labour councillor Trevor Muten, the council’s cabinet member for transport, said that the scheme took £3,829.
Councillor Muten said: “From my site visit with (council) officers to Portsmouth as part of the research for our scheme, any permanent facility would take three to four years to become established in terms of patronage and it would see significant growth over this period as awareness of it grew.
“The summer park and ride was priced competitively, with a car full of people being able to park all day and travel to and from the city for £7. Parking for blue badge holders was free.”
Councillor West has long criticised Labour’s park and ride plans, saying that Brighton and Hove was served by three railway lines and several bus and coach routes so any drivers using a park and ride would probably have driven in anyway.
Market research, with responses from a third of users, found that more than three quarters of the responders would have driven into Brighton anyway.
But 5 per cent of respondents said that they would not have come to Brighton and Hove at all without the park and ride.
Councillor Muten said: “The summer park and ride has provided key learnings for taking forward park and ride in the city, ensuring value for money is offered in terms of learning more about demand, journey origins of users and operational considerations prior to implementing a permanent site.
“This trial has value beyond the financial and, given the city environment is precious, determining whether to proceed with a scheme solely on profit seems not to value the city’s residents or its environment.
“After some two decades without a dedicated official park and ride and the lack of political will or leadership to enable this, it is about time we got started.”
Cheaper to get everyone a taxi then.
Cost 52,000
Users 1,400
Equals £37 each, surely a stretch limo or transit bus each would be cheaper.
RTFA:
“…any permanent facility would take three to four years to become established in terms of patronage”
Alternatively, do nothing and watch half of south London queue on West Street.
The cost for people was £7 per vehicle, so most people using it will have been groups of people car sharing / families etc. So the P&R would NOT have led to 200 fewer cars on the road each day it operated. If it was used mainly by households of 4 or more, the number of cars the scheme would have reduced on the roads would have been about 50.
Also worth bearing in mind that of those 50 cars, they were still on the road as they travelled from elsewhere to park at the uni in the first place. So it the scheme would only have resulted in around 50 cars just not driving from the university to central Brighton, not removing them from the road network altogether that day. The council can hardly claim this is sustainable transport – it’s clearly not.
Park and Ride is an outdated concept from the 1980s and 1990s, which doesn’t take cars off the road altogether and reduce emissions that way. True, it can mean that some people can avoid snarl ups by benefitting from being able to travel to the city centre in bus lanes, rather than being snarled up when they get here, but this should not be subsidised from taxpayers money in the way it has been – very poor decision making imo on the council’s part. Why on earth the council doesn’t concentrate its efforts on properly sustainable transport options, rather than wasting money on its obsession with Park and Ride, is mind boggling.
£37 subsidy for each trip. They could throw in a massage for that.
“This trial has value beyond the financial and, given the city environment is precious, determining whether to proceed with a scheme solely on profit seems not to value the city’s residents or its environment”…why is this council suddenly interested in residents and the environment? They are usually dismissive and disinterested of both.
At £37 per person a family of 2 adults and 2 children could have travelled by first class train tickets from hundreds of miles away. The council would better spend its time looking at subsidising train travel (far more sustainable travel than park and ride). Labour’s P&R trial clearly evidences that subsidising train travel would be cheaper in many scenarios that the £37 per person park and ride fiasco they’ve trialled!
If Cllr Trevor Muten is genuine when he says a “scheme solely on profit seems not to value the city’s residents or its environment” why isn’t he looking at train travel which is far better for the environment in every way shape and form that the park and ride scheme he’s been championing.
They’ve always been interested in environment, Lev. I imagine they are dismissive and disinterested in you specifically, because you keep threatening to sue them frivolously every Pride Festival.
Seems expensive per user but guessing that pilot schemes are usually expensive? Might be interesting to know pilot scheme costs for other established schemes
And the wider factors as well, such as the 5% who said they would not have visited without, did they spend money in Brighton, and is that a quantifiable balance to the scheme.
Also, is that costs just including fees, or does it also include things like advertising, BHCC staffing time, legal, etc?
I think the data is a little light as reported to make a determination, and why just numbers without context don’t give a poor assessment.
Until BH sorts out a reliable train service which doesn’t turn into cancellations and bus replacements every bank holiday without fail and a regular enough coach service, it has no right to penalise vehicles accessing the city centre. around 40% of which are EV anyway.
There’s no penalty for entering the city, Tracey.
As EVs only represent 5.3% of the vehicles on the UKs roads I doubt very much that a figure of 40% for Brighton is very realistic.
Also Brighton Clowncil, as totally useless as it is, as nothing to do with the operation of our train services or the National Express buses both of which are run by private companies…
Cllr Muten does know that in the last 10 years the Labour party in Brighton and Hove formed the administration after EVERY local election (2015, 2019 and 2023). So when he says “After some two decades without a dedicated official park and ride and the lack of political will or leadership to enable this, it is about time we got started” presumably he is accepting that since 2015 his own parties lack of political will is a key factor and the failure he is implying there has been?
The Greens formed a minority administration for a few years during the pandemic only when the Labour administration collapsed in July 2020 and they had to step in: https://www.brightonandhovenews.org/2020/08/30/how-a-tumultuous-labour-administration-failed-brighton-and-hove-and-brought-shame-to-our-city/.
It has been a hung council between 2015 – 2023. Minority administrations are not effective because the “political will” is pointing in different directions. You only really get extremely uncontentious projects through, and those typically lack ambition.
If cllr Muten is involved, you can guarantee it’s an expensive failure!
To look at something as badly marketed as it was to take that many people shows that actually although the numbers are small if done properly the demand would be there.
There is a massive carpark by falmer train station (Aldridge cricket academy) and the 28/29 and 3X could very easily call in very close to that carpark, which would reduce the associated costs enormously.the 25X could even become a permanent more frequent affair.
Is it used in the Summer and at weekends for matches?
If Muten is concerned about the ‘environment’ why has he pushed ahead with vg3 in the full knowledge it will lead to more congestion and pollution?