Fresh delays as Colchester park and ride opening pushed back to Autumn 2014

COLCHESTER’S first park and ride will finally open in autumn 2014.

Essex County Council will start seeking a contractor to build a 1,000 space facility on the £3.4 million site at Cuckoo Farm this spring, and the project will take 18 months.

Action is being taken after a provisional agreement was finally reached with landowners to build a £10 million road linking the north of Colchester with A12 junction 28 and the forthcoming park and ride.

Construction work is due to start this summer and be completed by summer 2014. Both projects were due to be up and running by the end of this year.

But Derrick Louis, councillor responsible for highways at Essex County Council, revealed a planned bus lane running along the Northern Approach Road will not be built in the near future.

See Monday's Gazette for an exclusive special report.

Comments (26)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

8:43pm Sun 10 Feb 13

Route88 says...

It may have been a good idea to have the High Street closure and the park and ride start together!
It may have been a good idea to have the High Street closure and the park and ride start together! Route88

8:43pm Sun 10 Feb 13

greenbroker says...

Snoooze.......wake me up when it arrives. OTOH I might be dead.
Snoooze.......wake me up when it arrives. OTOH I might be dead. greenbroker

8:50pm Sun 10 Feb 13

jut1972 says...

But Derrick Louis, councillor responsible for highways at Essex County Council, revealed a planned bus lane running along the Northern Approach Road will not be built in the near future.

eh? they have started digging up the waste ground and put gates in for the heavy machines...
But Derrick Louis, councillor responsible for highways at Essex County Council, revealed a planned bus lane running along the Northern Approach Road will not be built in the near future. eh? they have started digging up the waste ground and put gates in for the heavy machines... jut1972

12:22am Mon 11 Feb 13

Boris says...

Very few people are going to use this park and ride, so does the delay really matter? Anyway it seems there won't be a dedicated bus lane so that puts the kibosh on it anyway. Still, nice work for some contractors, and jobs for drivers of bulldozers and the like, so it's not entirely useless.
Very few people are going to use this park and ride, so does the delay really matter? Anyway it seems there won't be a dedicated bus lane so that puts the kibosh on it anyway. Still, nice work for some contractors, and jobs for drivers of bulldozers and the like, so it's not entirely useless. Boris

8:42am Mon 11 Feb 13

Say It As It Is OK? says...

Tend to agree with Boris, there will be few takers for the P&R and without the dedicated bus lane or the improvements to traffic flow under North Station Bridge, that were never planned anyway, it's likely to be a nightmare for anyone thinking they can get into Colchester quickly using the P&R.
Tend to agree with Boris, there will be few takers for the P&R and without the dedicated bus lane or the improvements to traffic flow under North Station Bridge, that were never planned anyway, it's likely to be a nightmare for anyone thinking they can get into Colchester quickly using the P&R. Say It As It Is OK?

9:33am Mon 11 Feb 13

wellnow says...

It is a very bad use of the english language to place the words planning and council in the same sentence.
It is a very bad use of the english language to place the words planning and council in the same sentence. wellnow

9:58am Mon 11 Feb 13

ICareCol says...

Whenever, or if ever, this so-called Park & Ride actually opens few will use it!
If drivers take the trouble to go to A12 Junction 28, they will surely find it much quicker and easier to continue on to Ipswich, where they will have a much more pleasant shopping environment, AND an efficient Park & Ride system.
Whenever, or if ever, this so-called Park & Ride actually opens few will use it! If drivers take the trouble to go to A12 Junction 28, they will surely find it much quicker and easier to continue on to Ipswich, where they will have a much more pleasant shopping environment, AND an efficient Park & Ride system. ICareCol

10:08am Mon 11 Feb 13

Boris says...

ICareCol wrote:
Whenever, or if ever, this so-called Park & Ride actually opens few will use it!
If drivers take the trouble to go to A12 Junction 28, they will surely find it much quicker and easier to continue on to Ipswich, where they will have a much more pleasant shopping environment, AND an efficient Park & Ride system.
The position of our P and R is meant to attract mainly people from the Ipswich area, so, as you say, very few people are going to come our way.
[quote][p][bold]ICareCol[/bold] wrote: Whenever, or if ever, this so-called Park & Ride actually opens few will use it! If drivers take the trouble to go to A12 Junction 28, they will surely find it much quicker and easier to continue on to Ipswich, where they will have a much more pleasant shopping environment, AND an efficient Park & Ride system.[/p][/quote]The position of our P and R is meant to attract mainly people from the Ipswich area, so, as you say, very few people are going to come our way. Boris

10:37am Mon 11 Feb 13

TheCaptain says...

How very sad you all are. Essex CC are spending money in Colchester and all you can do is moan.
How very sad you all are. Essex CC are spending money in Colchester and all you can do is moan. TheCaptain

11:47am Mon 11 Feb 13

romantic says...

TheCaptain wrote:
How very sad you all are. Essex CC are spending money in Colchester and all you can do is moan.
The thing is that there is no point spending money unless it achieves the desired outcome. Which is to cut down the traffic in the town, without driving people away completely.

The NAR extension needs to be completed first. When that is built, why not have a Park + Ride which uses the spaces at the football stadium? Give it a go, see if it works, and then decide whether to build the 1000-space site. The only days it could not be used would be match days - 23 home games, but some of those are midweek evening games, so perhaps 18 Saturdays in the year.

With NAR2 built, it should draw away a lot of the traffic that currently has to use Ipswich Road and Cowdray Avenue.

My own view is that P+R can work, but it needs to be sited in a different place - probably Tollgate area, with another one on the East side of town.

On a wider level, plenty of people could actually get rid of their cars and use public transport, car shares, cycling or walking. Not everybody, but plenty could do that. The solution is not to just more and bigger roads.
[quote][p][bold]TheCaptain[/bold] wrote: How very sad you all are. Essex CC are spending money in Colchester and all you can do is moan.[/p][/quote]The thing is that there is no point spending money unless it achieves the desired outcome. Which is to cut down the traffic in the town, without driving people away completely. The NAR extension needs to be completed first. When that is built, why not have a Park + Ride which uses the spaces at the football stadium? Give it a go, see if it works, and then decide whether to build the 1000-space site. The only days it could not be used would be match days - 23 home games, but some of those are midweek evening games, so perhaps 18 Saturdays in the year. With NAR2 built, it should draw away a lot of the traffic that currently has to use Ipswich Road and Cowdray Avenue. My own view is that P+R can work, but it needs to be sited in a different place - probably Tollgate area, with another one on the East side of town. On a wider level, plenty of people could actually get rid of their cars and use public transport, car shares, cycling or walking. Not everybody, but plenty could do that. The solution is not to just more and bigger roads. romantic

1:12pm Mon 11 Feb 13

TheCaptain says...

romantic wrote:
TheCaptain wrote:
How very sad you all are. Essex CC are spending money in Colchester and all you can do is moan.
The thing is that there is no point spending money unless it achieves the desired outcome. Which is to cut down the traffic in the town, without driving people away completely.

The NAR extension needs to be completed first. When that is built, why not have a Park + Ride which uses the spaces at the football stadium? Give it a go, see if it works, and then decide whether to build the 1000-space site. The only days it could not be used would be match days - 23 home games, but some of those are midweek evening games, so perhaps 18 Saturdays in the year.

With NAR2 built, it should draw away a lot of the traffic that currently has to use Ipswich Road and Cowdray Avenue.

My own view is that P+R can work, but it needs to be sited in a different place - probably Tollgate area, with another one on the East side of town.

On a wider level, plenty of people could actually get rid of their cars and use public transport, car shares, cycling or walking. Not everybody, but plenty could do that. The solution is not to just more and bigger roads.
Well if the money isn't spent here it will be spent in Chelmsford.

I can't see how a trial at the football ground would work when it would have to be closed on Saturdays. 18 doesn't sound many but that's just under a 1/3.

CUFC might like the extra income though.

As you say one at each end of the town would be a better idea.
[quote][p][bold]romantic[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]TheCaptain[/bold] wrote: How very sad you all are. Essex CC are spending money in Colchester and all you can do is moan.[/p][/quote]The thing is that there is no point spending money unless it achieves the desired outcome. Which is to cut down the traffic in the town, without driving people away completely. The NAR extension needs to be completed first. When that is built, why not have a Park + Ride which uses the spaces at the football stadium? Give it a go, see if it works, and then decide whether to build the 1000-space site. The only days it could not be used would be match days - 23 home games, but some of those are midweek evening games, so perhaps 18 Saturdays in the year. With NAR2 built, it should draw away a lot of the traffic that currently has to use Ipswich Road and Cowdray Avenue. My own view is that P+R can work, but it needs to be sited in a different place - probably Tollgate area, with another one on the East side of town. On a wider level, plenty of people could actually get rid of their cars and use public transport, car shares, cycling or walking. Not everybody, but plenty could do that. The solution is not to just more and bigger roads.[/p][/quote]Well if the money isn't spent here it will be spent in Chelmsford. I can't see how a trial at the football ground would work when it would have to be closed on Saturdays. 18 doesn't sound many but that's just under a 1/3. CUFC might like the extra income though. As you say one at each end of the town would be a better idea. TheCaptain

1:34pm Mon 11 Feb 13

wellnow says...

Park and ride to where? A town with very little to attract appreciable numbers of visitor's.get the new na road built so the people north of colchester can get access swiftly to the a12.to shop elsewhere.
Park and ride to where? A town with very little to attract appreciable numbers of visitor's.get the new na road built so the people north of colchester can get access swiftly to the a12.to shop elsewhere. wellnow

2:16pm Mon 11 Feb 13

romantic says...

TheCaptain wrote:
romantic wrote:
TheCaptain wrote:
How very sad you all are. Essex CC are spending money in Colchester and all you can do is moan.
The thing is that there is no point spending money unless it achieves the desired outcome. Which is to cut down the traffic in the town, without driving people away completely.

The NAR extension needs to be completed first. When that is built, why not have a Park + Ride which uses the spaces at the football stadium? Give it a go, see if it works, and then decide whether to build the 1000-space site. The only days it could not be used would be match days - 23 home games, but some of those are midweek evening games, so perhaps 18 Saturdays in the year.

With NAR2 built, it should draw away a lot of the traffic that currently has to use Ipswich Road and Cowdray Avenue.

My own view is that P+R can work, but it needs to be sited in a different place - probably Tollgate area, with another one on the East side of town.

On a wider level, plenty of people could actually get rid of their cars and use public transport, car shares, cycling or walking. Not everybody, but plenty could do that. The solution is not to just more and bigger roads.
Well if the money isn't spent here it will be spent in Chelmsford.

I can't see how a trial at the football ground would work when it would have to be closed on Saturdays. 18 doesn't sound many but that's just under a 1/3.

CUFC might like the extra income though.

As you say one at each end of the town would be a better idea.
Putting it another way, it would be potentially available 295 days out of 313 (not counting Sundays).

It would be just a trial, to see how it goes. If it works, then we go the plan of building the 1,000-space permanent site. If not, we think again. It just seems more sensible to do that than spend the millions first and then find nobody wants to use it. It sounds a strange thing to say, after all the years this has already taken, but in a way we don´t need to rush these things. Stage one has to be getting NAR2 open, as that may have the effect of unblocking some of the routes which are currently overloaded.
[quote][p][bold]TheCaptain[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]romantic[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]TheCaptain[/bold] wrote: How very sad you all are. Essex CC are spending money in Colchester and all you can do is moan.[/p][/quote]The thing is that there is no point spending money unless it achieves the desired outcome. Which is to cut down the traffic in the town, without driving people away completely. The NAR extension needs to be completed first. When that is built, why not have a Park + Ride which uses the spaces at the football stadium? Give it a go, see if it works, and then decide whether to build the 1000-space site. The only days it could not be used would be match days - 23 home games, but some of those are midweek evening games, so perhaps 18 Saturdays in the year. With NAR2 built, it should draw away a lot of the traffic that currently has to use Ipswich Road and Cowdray Avenue. My own view is that P+R can work, but it needs to be sited in a different place - probably Tollgate area, with another one on the East side of town. On a wider level, plenty of people could actually get rid of their cars and use public transport, car shares, cycling or walking. Not everybody, but plenty could do that. The solution is not to just more and bigger roads.[/p][/quote]Well if the money isn't spent here it will be spent in Chelmsford. I can't see how a trial at the football ground would work when it would have to be closed on Saturdays. 18 doesn't sound many but that's just under a 1/3. CUFC might like the extra income though. As you say one at each end of the town would be a better idea.[/p][/quote]Putting it another way, it would be potentially available 295 days out of 313 (not counting Sundays). It would be just a trial, to see how it goes. If it works, then we go the plan of building the 1,000-space permanent site. If not, we think again. It just seems more sensible to do that than spend the millions first and then find nobody wants to use it. It sounds a strange thing to say, after all the years this has already taken, but in a way we don´t need to rush these things. Stage one has to be getting NAR2 open, as that may have the effect of unblocking some of the routes which are currently overloaded. romantic

2:29pm Mon 11 Feb 13

Boris says...

TheCaptain wrote:
How very sad you all are. Essex CC are spending money in Colchester and all you can do is moan.
ECC spent £250,000 on a cycle lane in Crouch Street, which is hardly used by cyclists.
ECC spent an estimated £3,500,000 on a so-called bus station which is nothing of the sort.
ECC should be spending money repairing Colchester's potholes, but does not repair them even in the street where a Tory county councillor lives.
How can we have any confidence in how ECC spends its money?
[quote][p][bold]TheCaptain[/bold] wrote: How very sad you all are. Essex CC are spending money in Colchester and all you can do is moan.[/p][/quote]ECC spent £250,000 on a cycle lane in Crouch Street, which is hardly used by cyclists. ECC spent an estimated £3,500,000 on a so-called bus station which is nothing of the sort. ECC should be spending money repairing Colchester's potholes, but does not repair them even in the street where a Tory county councillor lives. How can we have any confidence in how ECC spends its money? Boris

3:04pm Mon 11 Feb 13

TheCaptain says...

romantic wrote:
TheCaptain wrote:
romantic wrote:
TheCaptain wrote:
How very sad you all are. Essex CC are spending money in Colchester and all you can do is moan.
The thing is that there is no point spending money unless it achieves the desired outcome. Which is to cut down the traffic in the town, without driving people away completely.

The NAR extension needs to be completed first. When that is built, why not have a Park + Ride which uses the spaces at the football stadium? Give it a go, see if it works, and then decide whether to build the 1000-space site. The only days it could not be used would be match days - 23 home games, but some of those are midweek evening games, so perhaps 18 Saturdays in the year.

With NAR2 built, it should draw away a lot of the traffic that currently has to use Ipswich Road and Cowdray Avenue.

My own view is that P+R can work, but it needs to be sited in a different place - probably Tollgate area, with another one on the East side of town.

On a wider level, plenty of people could actually get rid of their cars and use public transport, car shares, cycling or walking. Not everybody, but plenty could do that. The solution is not to just more and bigger roads.
Well if the money isn't spent here it will be spent in Chelmsford.

I can't see how a trial at the football ground would work when it would have to be closed on Saturdays. 18 doesn't sound many but that's just under a 1/3.

CUFC might like the extra income though.

As you say one at each end of the town would be a better idea.
Putting it another way, it would be potentially available 295 days out of 313 (not counting Sundays).

It would be just a trial, to see how it goes. If it works, then we go the plan of building the 1,000-space permanent site. If not, we think again. It just seems more sensible to do that than spend the millions first and then find nobody wants to use it. It sounds a strange thing to say, after all the years this has already taken, but in a way we don´t need to rush these things. Stage one has to be getting NAR2 open, as that may have the effect of unblocking some of the routes which are currently overloaded.
True I suppose. I was thinking how annoyed people would be, turn up for park and ride on a Saturday and can't use it as it's the football car park.
[quote][p][bold]romantic[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]TheCaptain[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]romantic[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]TheCaptain[/bold] wrote: How very sad you all are. Essex CC are spending money in Colchester and all you can do is moan.[/p][/quote]The thing is that there is no point spending money unless it achieves the desired outcome. Which is to cut down the traffic in the town, without driving people away completely. The NAR extension needs to be completed first. When that is built, why not have a Park + Ride which uses the spaces at the football stadium? Give it a go, see if it works, and then decide whether to build the 1000-space site. The only days it could not be used would be match days - 23 home games, but some of those are midweek evening games, so perhaps 18 Saturdays in the year. With NAR2 built, it should draw away a lot of the traffic that currently has to use Ipswich Road and Cowdray Avenue. My own view is that P+R can work, but it needs to be sited in a different place - probably Tollgate area, with another one on the East side of town. On a wider level, plenty of people could actually get rid of their cars and use public transport, car shares, cycling or walking. Not everybody, but plenty could do that. The solution is not to just more and bigger roads.[/p][/quote]Well if the money isn't spent here it will be spent in Chelmsford. I can't see how a trial at the football ground would work when it would have to be closed on Saturdays. 18 doesn't sound many but that's just under a 1/3. CUFC might like the extra income though. As you say one at each end of the town would be a better idea.[/p][/quote]Putting it another way, it would be potentially available 295 days out of 313 (not counting Sundays). It would be just a trial, to see how it goes. If it works, then we go the plan of building the 1,000-space permanent site. If not, we think again. It just seems more sensible to do that than spend the millions first and then find nobody wants to use it. It sounds a strange thing to say, after all the years this has already taken, but in a way we don´t need to rush these things. Stage one has to be getting NAR2 open, as that may have the effect of unblocking some of the routes which are currently overloaded.[/p][/quote]True I suppose. I was thinking how annoyed people would be, turn up for park and ride on a Saturday and can't use it as it's the football car park. TheCaptain

3:07pm Mon 11 Feb 13

TheCaptain says...

Boris wrote:
TheCaptain wrote:
How very sad you all are. Essex CC are spending money in Colchester and all you can do is moan.
ECC spent £250,000 on a cycle lane in Crouch Street, which is hardly used by cyclists.
ECC spent an estimated £3,500,000 on a so-called bus station which is nothing of the sort.
ECC should be spending money repairing Colchester's potholes, but does not repair them even in the street where a Tory county councillor lives.
How can we have any confidence in how ECC spends its money?
Yes it would be great if they repaired the roads.

However I'm glad they are spending money in Colchester rather than Chelmsford etc.

I believe you are making up the costs of the bus station again. And whilst it may not be a bus station in the conventional sense (loads of parking for out of service buses) I can say that it has improved my daily bus journeys
[quote][p][bold]Boris[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]TheCaptain[/bold] wrote: How very sad you all are. Essex CC are spending money in Colchester and all you can do is moan.[/p][/quote]ECC spent £250,000 on a cycle lane in Crouch Street, which is hardly used by cyclists. ECC spent an estimated £3,500,000 on a so-called bus station which is nothing of the sort. ECC should be spending money repairing Colchester's potholes, but does not repair them even in the street where a Tory county councillor lives. How can we have any confidence in how ECC spends its money?[/p][/quote]Yes it would be great if they repaired the roads. However I'm glad they are spending money in Colchester rather than Chelmsford etc. I believe you are making up the costs of the bus station again. And whilst it may not be a bus station in the conventional sense (loads of parking for out of service buses) I can say that it has improved my daily bus journeys TheCaptain

5:02pm Mon 11 Feb 13

romantic says...

TheCaptain wrote:
romantic wrote:
TheCaptain wrote:
romantic wrote:
TheCaptain wrote:
How very sad you all are. Essex CC are spending money in Colchester and all you can do is moan.
The thing is that there is no point spending money unless it achieves the desired outcome. Which is to cut down the traffic in the town, without driving people away completely.

The NAR extension needs to be completed first. When that is built, why not have a Park + Ride which uses the spaces at the football stadium? Give it a go, see if it works, and then decide whether to build the 1000-space site. The only days it could not be used would be match days - 23 home games, but some of those are midweek evening games, so perhaps 18 Saturdays in the year.

With NAR2 built, it should draw away a lot of the traffic that currently has to use Ipswich Road and Cowdray Avenue.

My own view is that P+R can work, but it needs to be sited in a different place - probably Tollgate area, with another one on the East side of town.

On a wider level, plenty of people could actually get rid of their cars and use public transport, car shares, cycling or walking. Not everybody, but plenty could do that. The solution is not to just more and bigger roads.
Well if the money isn't spent here it will be spent in Chelmsford.

I can't see how a trial at the football ground would work when it would have to be closed on Saturdays. 18 doesn't sound many but that's just under a 1/3.

CUFC might like the extra income though.

As you say one at each end of the town would be a better idea.
Putting it another way, it would be potentially available 295 days out of 313 (not counting Sundays).

It would be just a trial, to see how it goes. If it works, then we go the plan of building the 1,000-space permanent site. If not, we think again. It just seems more sensible to do that than spend the millions first and then find nobody wants to use it. It sounds a strange thing to say, after all the years this has already taken, but in a way we don´t need to rush these things. Stage one has to be getting NAR2 open, as that may have the effect of unblocking some of the routes which are currently overloaded.
True I suppose. I was thinking how annoyed people would be, turn up for park and ride on a Saturday and can't use it as it's the football car park.
Well, that is true, but in a way, it just means we´d be back to how it is now. It would need to be signposted off the A12, with signs saying "Closed on match days: next closure **** ". Clearly, it would need a bit of thought and liaison with CUFC, and it is just an idea to see how it goes first.
[quote][p][bold]TheCaptain[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]romantic[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]TheCaptain[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]romantic[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]TheCaptain[/bold] wrote: How very sad you all are. Essex CC are spending money in Colchester and all you can do is moan.[/p][/quote]The thing is that there is no point spending money unless it achieves the desired outcome. Which is to cut down the traffic in the town, without driving people away completely. The NAR extension needs to be completed first. When that is built, why not have a Park + Ride which uses the spaces at the football stadium? Give it a go, see if it works, and then decide whether to build the 1000-space site. The only days it could not be used would be match days - 23 home games, but some of those are midweek evening games, so perhaps 18 Saturdays in the year. With NAR2 built, it should draw away a lot of the traffic that currently has to use Ipswich Road and Cowdray Avenue. My own view is that P+R can work, but it needs to be sited in a different place - probably Tollgate area, with another one on the East side of town. On a wider level, plenty of people could actually get rid of their cars and use public transport, car shares, cycling or walking. Not everybody, but plenty could do that. The solution is not to just more and bigger roads.[/p][/quote]Well if the money isn't spent here it will be spent in Chelmsford. I can't see how a trial at the football ground would work when it would have to be closed on Saturdays. 18 doesn't sound many but that's just under a 1/3. CUFC might like the extra income though. As you say one at each end of the town would be a better idea.[/p][/quote]Putting it another way, it would be potentially available 295 days out of 313 (not counting Sundays). It would be just a trial, to see how it goes. If it works, then we go the plan of building the 1,000-space permanent site. If not, we think again. It just seems more sensible to do that than spend the millions first and then find nobody wants to use it. It sounds a strange thing to say, after all the years this has already taken, but in a way we don´t need to rush these things. Stage one has to be getting NAR2 open, as that may have the effect of unblocking some of the routes which are currently overloaded.[/p][/quote]True I suppose. I was thinking how annoyed people would be, turn up for park and ride on a Saturday and can't use it as it's the football car park.[/p][/quote]Well, that is true, but in a way, it just means we´d be back to how it is now. It would need to be signposted off the A12, with signs saying "Closed on match days: next closure **** ". Clearly, it would need a bit of thought and liaison with CUFC, and it is just an idea to see how it goes first. romantic

2:03am Tue 12 Feb 13

angryman!!! says...

what a stupid comment saying that people would continue to Ipswich as there park and ride is better. ITS NOT EVEN OPENED you gimp. Get a grip of your sad sorry life, you miserable moaning troll.
what a stupid comment saying that people would continue to Ipswich as there park and ride is better. ITS NOT EVEN OPENED you gimp. Get a grip of your sad sorry life, you miserable moaning troll. angryman!!!

2:10am Tue 12 Feb 13

Boris says...

TheCaptain wrote:
Boris wrote:
TheCaptain wrote:
How very sad you all are. Essex CC are spending money in Colchester and all you can do is moan.
ECC spent £250,000 on a cycle lane in Crouch Street, which is hardly used by cyclists.
ECC spent an estimated £3,500,000 on a so-called bus station which is nothing of the sort.
ECC should be spending money repairing Colchester's potholes, but does not repair them even in the street where a Tory county councillor lives.
How can we have any confidence in how ECC spends its money?
Yes it would be great if they repaired the roads.

However I'm glad they are spending money in Colchester rather than Chelmsford etc.

I believe you are making up the costs of the bus station again. And whilst it may not be a bus station in the conventional sense (loads of parking for out of service buses) I can say that it has improved my daily bus journeys
I'm pleased to know your bus journeys have been improved. Not many people can say that.
As for the cost, CBC and ECC have both refused to confirm this, despite Freedom of Information requests. I said my figure was estimated, and I used the most plausible estimate. If you have better information, please tell us.
[quote][p][bold]TheCaptain[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Boris[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]TheCaptain[/bold] wrote: How very sad you all are. Essex CC are spending money in Colchester and all you can do is moan.[/p][/quote]ECC spent £250,000 on a cycle lane in Crouch Street, which is hardly used by cyclists. ECC spent an estimated £3,500,000 on a so-called bus station which is nothing of the sort. ECC should be spending money repairing Colchester's potholes, but does not repair them even in the street where a Tory county councillor lives. How can we have any confidence in how ECC spends its money?[/p][/quote]Yes it would be great if they repaired the roads. However I'm glad they are spending money in Colchester rather than Chelmsford etc. I believe you are making up the costs of the bus station again. And whilst it may not be a bus station in the conventional sense (loads of parking for out of service buses) I can say that it has improved my daily bus journeys[/p][/quote]I'm pleased to know your bus journeys have been improved. Not many people can say that. As for the cost, CBC and ECC have both refused to confirm this, despite Freedom of Information requests. I said my figure was estimated, and I used the most plausible estimate. If you have better information, please tell us. Boris

7:20am Tue 12 Feb 13

super waluigi says...

Moan, moan, moan.

Boris and co, I completely disagree that a park and ride would go unused. It might appear to be a rubbish town centre to some locals, but Colchester has a great shopping reputation to those people that live as far as the east end or Norwich in the opposite direction.
At the moment, Colchester has some great tourist attractions. The Zoo, The football stadium, the Castle and Firstsite (I understand it is not everyones cup of tea) will all attract visitors to colchester. Why not link them all together????
There is so much potential in Colchester, if only small minded people would open up their minds a little, especially to what might suit others above themselves.
Moan, moan, moan. Boris and co, I completely disagree that a park and ride would go unused. It might appear to be a rubbish town centre to some locals, but Colchester has a great shopping reputation to those people that live as far as the east end or Norwich in the opposite direction. At the moment, Colchester has some great tourist attractions. The Zoo, The football stadium, the Castle and Firstsite (I understand it is not everyones cup of tea) will all attract visitors to colchester. Why not link them all together???? There is so much potential in Colchester, if only small minded people would open up their minds a little, especially to what might suit others above themselves. super waluigi

12:13pm Tue 12 Feb 13

angryman!!! says...

best comment super, totally agree. is it perfect, no, should the bus lane be built, yes. however this is a start. the bus lane will mean that people from the surrounding villages and small towns that already use Colchester will have another option rather than parking in town centre, therefore hopefully having a knock on effect on traffic in town, which I know the majority of people on this site would believe is grid lock but for those of us that actually travel will know it is the same as any other town/city, and having lived in Ipswich for some years thankfully is not as bad as Ipswich generally.
theres plenty to moan about the council but this is def not one of them.
best comment super, totally agree. is it perfect, no, should the bus lane be built, yes. however this is a start. the bus lane will mean that people from the surrounding villages and small towns that already use Colchester will have another option rather than parking in town centre, therefore hopefully having a knock on effect on traffic in town, which I know the majority of people on this site would believe is grid lock but for those of us that actually travel will know it is the same as any other town/city, and having lived in Ipswich for some years thankfully is not as bad as Ipswich generally. theres plenty to moan about the council but this is def not one of them. angryman!!!

3:29pm Tue 12 Feb 13

Hamiltonandy says...

I have cycled on the Crouch street route but could not see much of a gain over the faster route using the roads. Also pedestrians come first and do not expect to see a bicycle so you have to be cautious.
.
I remember visiting Chelmsford, by car, and loved their Park&Ride by the A12. Easy to access and a fast bus to the centre on almost empty roads.
.
We could have had temporary Park&Rides around Colchester, decades ago, using simple porous ground sheets with gravel on top. A risky gamble to opt for a single site with expensive construction costs and traffic clogged road access to Colchester.
I have cycled on the Crouch street route but could not see much of a gain over the faster route using the roads. Also pedestrians come first and do not expect to see a bicycle so you have to be cautious. . I remember visiting Chelmsford, by car, and loved their Park&Ride by the A12. Easy to access and a fast bus to the centre on almost empty roads. . We could have had temporary Park&Rides around Colchester, decades ago, using simple porous ground sheets with gravel on top. A risky gamble to opt for a single site with expensive construction costs and traffic clogged road access to Colchester. Hamiltonandy

10:42am Wed 13 Feb 13

PROOFREADER says...

It is not Colchester's first park and ride. There used to be a park and ride from North Station into the town and another from a car park in Butt Road. The buses were numbered C1 and C2. The service was stopped through lack of use.
One of the buses used to stop opposite Marks and Spencers. I only ever saw half a dozen people on it at the most.
It is not Colchester's first park and ride. There used to be a park and ride from North Station into the town and another from a car park in Butt Road. The buses were numbered C1 and C2. The service was stopped through lack of use. One of the buses used to stop opposite Marks and Spencers. I only ever saw half a dozen people on it at the most. PROOFREADER

11:07am Wed 13 Feb 13

TheCaptain says...

PROOFREADER wrote:
It is not Colchester's first park and ride. There used to be a park and ride from North Station into the town and another from a car park in Butt Road. The buses were numbered C1 and C2. The service was stopped through lack of use.
One of the buses used to stop opposite Marks and Spencers. I only ever saw half a dozen people on it at the most.
The problem with those Park and Rides is that you were almost in the town centre anyway
[quote][p][bold]PROOFREADER[/bold] wrote: It is not Colchester's first park and ride. There used to be a park and ride from North Station into the town and another from a car park in Butt Road. The buses were numbered C1 and C2. The service was stopped through lack of use. One of the buses used to stop opposite Marks and Spencers. I only ever saw half a dozen people on it at the most.[/p][/quote]The problem with those Park and Rides is that you were almost in the town centre anyway TheCaptain

11:32am Wed 13 Feb 13

Linstock says...

The way things have gone and are going in Colchester perhaps the 2014 P&R opening is timed to coincide with the closure of the last of the Town Centres retail outlets.
Thats the sort of planning we see nowadays.
The way things have gone and are going in Colchester perhaps the 2014 P&R opening is timed to coincide with the closure of the last of the Town Centres retail outlets. Thats the sort of planning we see nowadays. Linstock

3:45pm Wed 13 Feb 13

hughie-s says...

PROOFREADER wrote:
It is not Colchester's first park and ride. There used to be a park and ride from North Station into the town and another from a car park in Butt Road. The buses were numbered C1 and C2. The service was stopped through lack of use.
One of the buses used to stop opposite Marks and Spencers. I only ever saw half a dozen people on it at the most.
C1 & C2 were not the first either, there was a park & ride from Cavalry Barracks in December 1971 branded Lancer Buslink
[quote][p][bold]PROOFREADER[/bold] wrote: It is not Colchester's first park and ride. There used to be a park and ride from North Station into the town and another from a car park in Butt Road. The buses were numbered C1 and C2. The service was stopped through lack of use. One of the buses used to stop opposite Marks and Spencers. I only ever saw half a dozen people on it at the most.[/p][/quote]C1 & C2 were not the first either, there was a park & ride from Cavalry Barracks in December 1971 branded Lancer Buslink hughie-s

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

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