 
|
Policy Contribution
Table 13: Case Study Reports Conclusions
| Objective |
Atkins report on eight UK schemes |
Parkhurst report on eight UK
schemes |
| 
|
|
|
| 
|
 |
/ |
| 
|
 |
/
|
| 
|
? |
? |
| 
|
|
/ |
| 
|
/ |
/ |
| 
|
|
|
 |
= Weakest
possible positive contribution, |
 |
= strongest
possible positive contribution |
 |
= Weakest
possible negative contribution |
 |
= strongest
possible negative contribution |
 |
=
No contribution |
Table 14: Park and Ride - Case Study Results
| Problem |
Atkins report on eight UK schemes |
Parkhurst report
on eight UK schemes |
| Congestion-related delay |
|
/ |
| Congestion-related unreliability |
|
/ |
| Community severance |
|
/ |
| Visual intrusion |
|
/ |
| Lack of amenity |
|
/ |
| Global warming |
|
/ |
| Local air pollution |
|
/ |
| Noise |
|
/ |
| Reduction of green space |
|
|
| Damage to environmentally sensitive sites |
|
/ |
| Poor accessibility for those without a car and those with mobility
impairments |
/ |
/ |
| Disproportionate disadvantaging of particular social or geographic
groups |
/ |
/ |
| Number, severity and risk of accidents |
|
/ |
| Suppression of the potential for economic activity in the area
|
? |
? |
|
= Weakest
possible positive contribution, |
|
= strongest
possible positive contribution |
|
= Weakest
possible negative contribution |
|
= strongest
possible negative contribution |
|
=
No contribution |
Table 15: Park and Ride - Area Suitability
| Appropriate area-types |
| Area type |
Suitability |
| City centre |
- |
| Dense inner suburb |
|
| Medium density outer suburb |
|
| Less dense outer suburb |
|
| District centre |
|
| Corridor |
|
| Small town |
|
| Tourist town |
|
|
= Least suitable
area type |
|
= Most suitable
area type |
|
