Policy K: reasons for agreement or disagreement
Why do you agree with Policy K?
Base: All those who agree with Policy K (740)
| wdt_ID | Key themes | % |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Reduces traffic in city (and pollution) | 11 |
| 3 | Support/suggestions for route expansion e.g. consider events like Fratton Park home games for demand, routes to Southsea/the seafront, Eastney, QA hospital, Port Solent | 9 |
| 12 | General agreement/makes sense/logical | 8 |
| 13 | Timetables need to be improved too e.g. more frequent, year-round routes (not just in summer), extend hours, make more reliable | 5 |
| 14 | Suggestions for other sites e.g. on east of the city (Hilsea, Farlington), outside the city, in local areas like Gosport (to make better use of the ferry) | 4 |
| 15 | Tickets e.g. should be free/price needs to stay low, allow other bus tickets to be used on Park and Ride | 4 |
| 16 | Expansion would encourage use/gives viable alternative to cars | 4 |
| 17 | Good for visitors | 2 |
| 18 | Needs to be encouraged/enforced e.g. incentives for using it, disincentives for driving into city (no visitor parking, higher fees, congestion charge), make mandatory for businesses or visitors | 2 |
| 19 | Suggestions for provisions on site/services e.g. café, allow bigger vehicles like motorhomes, overnight parking, more parking in general | 2 |
| 20 | Underused/needs better publicising and promotion | 1 |
| 21 | Not the only solution/priority e.g. need to combine with other policies/ interventions, use as overnight parking for residents | 1 |
| 22 | Join up with other transit systems e.g. trains | 1 |
| 23 | Current service doesn't work well enough e.g. routes not sufficient, reliability | 1 |
| 24 | Other e.g. sceptical if this will be done/is achievable, not useful to residents, don’t use Park and Ride | 3 |
| 25 | Na/no comment | 54 |
Please could you tell us why you disagree with Policy K?
Base: All those who disagree with Policy K (68)
| wdt_ID | Key themes | % |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Issues with park and ride e.g. timetables, routes, location | 22 |
| 3 | Sceptical about implementation | 10 |
| 12 | Park and Ride may be good on paper, but doesn't really work well in practice/not suitable for all journeys e.g. increases journey time or costs, not useful for big/ food shops where you need quick access to car | 10 |
| 13 | Too expensive | 6 |
| 14 | Not a complete solution e.g. cars still coming into the city | 6 |
| 15 | If other transport and policies are sufficient, this isn't needed | 6 |
| 16 | Policy is anti-car/anti-taxi/private vehicle | 6 |
| 17 | Prioritises visitors/should focus on residents | 4 |
| 18 | Other e.g. put other priorities first, should join up with other transit systems | 10 |
| 19 | Na/no comment | 28 |
Please could you tell us why you neither agree nor disagree with Policy K?
Base: All those who neither agree nor disagree with Policy K (271)
| wdt_ID | Key themes | % |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Don’t use it e.g. no reason to, doesn't meet their needs, no car | 18 |
| 3 | Neutral/not informed enough | 5 |
| 12 | Not a complete environmental solution/other policies need to be prioritised or will be more effective | 4 |
| 13 | Issues with/limitations of Park and Ride e.g. not convenient, timetables, early finish, hard to cater for everywhere | 4 |
| 14 | Unsure about current use/demand or Park and Ride/ feels underused | 4 |
| 15 | Suggested expansion site e.g. east of city | 4 |
| 16 | Generally positive | 3 |
| 17 | Not useful all the time/ for everyday use and won't be beneficial for locals | 3 |
| 18 | Cost of tickets are prohibitive | 2 |
| 19 | Concern about loss of (green) space | 2 |
| 20 | Suggested site improvements e.g. allow bigger vehicles, overnight parking, toilets | 1 |
| 21 | Other e.g. allow non-car users on, need to advertise it more, cost to taxpayers | 4 |
| 22 | Na/no comment | 54 |
