Merseyside: New stations planned

[Gareth]

Because facts are like Garlic to nationalists.

Poor play by your standards, Goebbels. You have a bit of a reputation with your 'facts' on SSC; one of the many reasons I don't post there anymore.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Gareth - are you actually suggesting Fflint is part of Liverpool's catchment area? Even the Wirral is tenuous, it's far better connected down the M53 towards Chester than it is across the water to Liverpool. The significant majority of it's catchment area is to the East - Runcorn, Widnes, St Helens, Kirkby, Ormskirk I suppose too.

Of course there are cheaper and more expensive bits of any city, but for a two bedroom, terraced house, not in perhaps the nicest of areas you're talking 75-80k in Manchester vice 40-50k in Liverpool - and even lower in some areas.

Liverpool's already well connected. Hourly train to London, two trains an hour to the North East, plenty of local trains. The local bus network is also impressive. The airport, whilst modest, is efficient and serves a select few destinations. And no, the Wirral is not tenuous. Jesus Christ.

I maintain, before we worry about things like massive infrastructure projects to improve national and international connections, Liverpool needs to get it's own economy in gear first. Street after street of pound shops, bars and bookies isn't a sustainable economy. It needs money investing in other places first, such as creating meaningful jobs and large scale retail projects.

Another arf-inducing post, Jonfun. I said I wasn't questioning your integrity in my previous post but I'm now starting to wonder; as for someone who supposedly lives in Liverpool, you have a surprising lack of familiarity with the place. There isn't "street after street of pound shops, bars and bookies" and you know it. The city has similar amounts of those things as other similar-sized cities. Its retail offer is similar to Manchester and better than Leeds on most indicators. But hey, just because you've bought a house in what must be the poorest part of Liverpool and evidently never venture out the district, unless commuting to Manchester, you assume the whole city is exactly like your own limited experience of it.

Flint (and we'll stick to English spelling here), like the rest of North East Wales, is a part of the Liverpool metropolitan area, yes; and by extension the wider Northern megapolis. You think just because its in Wales these things don't count? And no, the Wirral is not tenuous, for the sake of Christ. Most of the Wirral is built up suburbs of Liverpool. It's not difficult to cross the river at all. Two road tunnels plus a rail tunnel with no less than 14tph per direction says it isn't. Yes, Chester's another place, albeit a much smaller one, which provides leisure and employment opportunities, particularly for the southerly part of the Peninsula but Chester's a part of the same metropolitan area to begin with.

Again with the property thing: just a quick look on the internet shows you can easily find 40-50k houses in Manchester. You can also get lower than that in both cities, provided you're willing to invest significant money in doing them up. Your previous insinuation that Manchester was London-style expensive and you had to travel 35 miles west befor you could afford anywhere is poppycock.

I agree that Liverpool has to get its economy in gear. That's the one sensible thing you've said in the last 24 hours, though contrary to your previous insinuation that it could just concentrate on being a Mancunian housing estate. However,it needs to be allowed to do that. It currently isn't, so long as the state remains so unhealthily centralised, with various unhelpful interventions and 'strategic' decisions screwing the city over (HS2 as a fine example). In most developed countries, bar perhaps the very small ones, cities (and counties, regions, provinces etc) are left to get on with it, can raise their own taxes and make their own decisions on a broad range of things. In this country, everything is micro-managed at a central level with one-size-fits-all policies which are largely tuned to optimise London. Manchester does well in being a regional administrative outpost for this regime but the city still isn't the 'Powerhouse' that the easily-led seem to believe it is and nor ever will be, so long as the current system is in place.

 

[frodshamfella]

Gareth - are you actually suggesting Fflint is part of Liverpool's catchment area? Even the Wirral is tenuous, it's far better connected down the M53 towards Chester than it is across the water to Liverpool. The significant majority of it's catchment area is to the East - Runcorn, Widnes, St Helens, Kirkby, Ormskirk I suppose too.

Of course there are cheaper and more expensive bits of any city, but for a two bedroom, terraced house, not in perhaps the nicest of areas you're talking 75-80k in Manchester vice 40-50k in Liverpool - and even lower in some areas.

Liverpool's already well connected. Hourly train to London, two trains an hour to the North East, plenty of local trains. The local bus network is also impressive. The airport, whilst modest, is efficient and serves a select few destinations.

I maintain, before we worry about things like massive infrastructure projects to improve national and international connections, Liverpool needs to get it's own economy in gear first. Street after street of pound shops, bars and bookies isn't a sustainable economy. It needs money investing in other places first, such as creating meaningful jobs and large scale retail projects.

Liverpool one ..is pretty large scale I would have thought

 

[507021]

I think the proposed stations at Maghull North, Vauxhall (I've heard that the name for this proposed station would be Lightbody Street) and St James would definitely benefit the areas that they would serve - and I hope that all three are built. I think however if St James is reopened it should be called Parliament Street instead to prevent any confusion with James Street

 

[martynbristow]

Poor play by your standards, Goebbels. You have a bit of a reputation with your 'facts' on SSC; one of the many reasons I don't post there anymore.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Another arf-inducing post, Jonfun. I said I wasn't questioning your integrity in my previous post but I'm now starting to wonder; as for someone who supposedly lives in Liverpool, you have a surprising lack of familiarity with the place. There isn't "street after street of pound shops, bars and bookies" and you know it. The city has similar amounts of those things as other similar-sized cities. Its retail offer is similar to Manchester and better than Leeds on most indicators. But hey, just because you've bought a house in what must be the poorest part of Liverpool and evidently never venture out the district, unless commuting to Manchester, you assume the whole city is exactly like your own limited experience of it.

Flint (and we'll stick to English spelling here), like the rest of North East Wales, is a part of the Liverpool metropolitan area, yes; and by extension the wider Northern megapolis. You think just because its in Wales these things don't count? And no, the Wirral is not tenuous, for the sake of Christ. Most of the Wirral is built up suburbs of Liverpool. It's not difficult to cross the river at all. Two road tunnels plus a rail tunnel with no less than 14tph per direction says it isn't. Yes, Chester's another place, albeit a much smaller one, which provides leisure and employment opportunities, particularly for the southerly part of the Peninsula but Chester's a part of the same metropolitan area to begin with.

Again with the property thing: just a quick look on the internet shows you can easily find 40-50k houses in Manchester. You can also get lower than that in both cities, provided you're willing to invest significant money in doing them up. Your previous insinuation that Manchester was London-style expensive and you had to travel 35 miles west befor you could afford anywhere is poppycock.

I agree that Liverpool has to get its economy in gear. That's the one sensible thing you've said in the last 24 hours, though contrary to your previous insinuation that it could just concentrate on being a Mancunian housing estate. However,it needs to be allowed to do that. It currently isn't, so long as the state remains so unhealthily centralised, with various unhelpful interventions and 'strategic' decisions screwing the city over (HS2 as a fine example). In most developed countries, bar perhaps the very small ones, cities (and counties, regions, provinces etc) are left to get on with it, can raise their own taxes and make their own decisions on a broad range of things. In this country, everything is micro-managed at a central level with one-size-fits-all policies which are largely tuned to optimise London. Manchester does well in being a regional administrative outpost for this regime but the city still isn't the 'Powerhouse' that the easily-led seem to believe it is and nor ever will be, so long as the current system is in place.

If you didnt know Flint is 25+ miles away driving and 50 minutes driving, by train its just over an hour, basically hourly. I think we can conclude Liverpool is more part of Msnchrster than Flint in Liverpool.
Yes Liverpool 1 is a great development and there are a couple of others but that's it!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I think the proposed stations at Maghull North, Vauxhall (I've heard that the name for this proposed station would be Lightbody Street) and St James would definitely benefit the areas that they would serve - and I hope that all three are built. I think however if St James is reopened it should be called Parliament Street instead to prevent any confusion with James Street

I heard the same, I wish Maghull North had been built years ago though IT was a long ride to Maghull

 

[pablo]

I know peeps who commute to Liverpool from Mold despite the congestion on the A550 in the morning so I think Flint has a claim.

 

[8A Rail]

.......................

I just have the feeling regardless what is being written about the positives aspects of Liverpool and there are very many, you just want to do the whole area down with some negative comments you make. As you seem to be clearly in love with Manchester, may I suggest you move to the area?

Personally, the two cities compliment each other, they both have different strengths and attractions. That will always remain the case that I'm sure. In the same way Manchester has had money spent within the city, so has Liverpool in may ways and both cities are still continuing to attract investors.

As far as "retail projects" and creating jobs, has Manchester City Centre got more than one major retail area, if it has, could you tell me about it please? Liverpool City Centre has got one major retail area too so what is the difference? Around both cities, there are numeorus developments going on and this will continue over time.

I regulary visit both city centre's and love them both for different reasons, again both cities compliment each other. In time I'm sure Liverpool City Region will come to being in the same way Manchester has at this current time and well done to them too.

 

[martynbristow]

I just have the feeling regardless what is being written about the positives aspects of Liverpool and there are very many, you just want to do the whole area down with some negative comments you make. As you seem to be clearly in love with Manchester, may I suggest you move to the area?

Personally, the two cities compliment each other, they both have different strengths and attractions. That will always remain the case that I'm sure. In the same way Manchester has had money spent within the city, so has Liverpool in may ways and both cities are still continuing to attract investors.

As far as "retail projects" and creating jobs, has Manchester City Centre got more than one major retail area, if it has, could you tell me about it please? Liverpool City Centre has got one major retail area too so what is the difference? Around both cities, there are numeorus developments going on and this will continue over time.

I regulary visit both city centre's and love them both for different reasons, again both cities compliment each other. In time I'm sure Liverpool City Region will come to being in the same way Manchester has at this current time and well done to them too.

Please don't question my feelings, and express your own sensibly.
I asked along time ago ... should Merseyrail be making huge commitments over getting HS2, given this decision lies with HS2, the government and the treasury. I doubt they will give us a spur that a all for the FACTS laid out above.
Liverpool has some positives, however Manchester has an advantage and does very well.
They do indeed compliment each other with a number of jobs in Manchester for people who live in Liverpool.

Manchester has the Arndale and the Trafford Centre, as they chose the out of town.

 

[flypie]

I think the proposed stations at Maghull North, Vauxhall (I've heard that the name for this proposed station would be Lightbody Street) and St James would definitely benefit the areas that they would serve - and I hope that all three are built. I think however if St James is reopened it should be called Parliament Street instead to prevent any confusion with James Street

I think Lightbody Street was my suggestion, I've not seen any official docs suggest that. It basically half way between Moorfields and Sandhills.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Get the cameras out, because you won't often hear me say this, but I agree with Martyn.

The killer point, which I notice Gareth doesn't address, is that Manchester's catchment area extends in all directions. Liverpool's extends (to simplify things, effectively) only eastwards - which then overlaps with the catchment area of Manchester.

Liverpool is poor. There's no getting around that. No amount of regeneration or investment in huge, pointless projects is going to change that. Why do I work in Manchester but live in Liverpool? Is it because of the large, extravagant parks? The vibrant nightlife? The friendly people? No. It's because it's cheap. I can afford a two bedroom house here for less than a studio flat would cost in Manchester. A pint costs £1.39 at my local.

Liverpool, along with most places further south, such as in the Midlands, gain the benefits of HS2 via the freed-up capacity on the classic lines.

The biggest failing of Liverpool's rail connections is that we have a train service to Manchester which takes longer than it did in the days of steam. Worry about the basics before we start anything else.

Liverpool's catchment area includes large chunks of North Wales. Which with the reinstament of the Halton curve should have better connections.
Manchester's catchment area does not stretch east, unless sheep are valuable customers. A catchment area cannot be measure simply by drawing a circle around an area. Wrexham in some circumstances can be seen as part of Liverpool's catchment because despite the distance Liverpool is still the nearest major city, improving the link will strengthen that bond.

 

[Gareth]

If you didnt know Flint is 25+ miles away driving and 50 minutes driving, by train its just over an hour, basically hourly. I think we can conclude Liverpool is more part of Msnchrster than Flint in Liverpool.

With respect, you don't quite get what a metropolitan area is. It's not been helped by WatcherZero obfuscating the situation with TTWAs which are related but, none the less, a different thing. North East Wales is most immediately connected to Chester, which is part of the Liverpool metropolitan area, which itself is part of a wider megapolis across with North. 50 minutes driving means nothing. You can't get from one side of London to the other in 50 minutes driving. In fact, it used to take me 50 minutes to get downtown from East Liverpool when commuting in rush hour. Yes, the train situation is ridiculous and its a bugbear locally considering the natural and traditional links between Liverpool and North Wales but it's an anomaly and not evidence that Liverpool and North/North East Wales have nothing to do with each other.

 

[507021]

I think Lightbody Street was my suggestion, I've not seen any official docs suggest that. It basically half way between Moorfields and Sandhills.

A good friend of mine who also uses this forum said that he had heard the suggestion Lightbody Street which I think is a very good idea. I think there are too many stations named after places on the Merseyrail network and it would be a pleasant change to see some named after the road/street they are on instead of the place they are in

There is a site on Lightbody Street that I think would be an excellent position for a station. I do wonder though how far any plans for a station in the Vauxhall area have progressed

I also think Otterspool station should be a candidate for reopening as I think it would provide a useful rail link for the housing estate on Jericho Lane and the population around Aigburth Road and Aigburth Vale

 

[flypie]

A bit of a boost for new stations out to Kirkby. http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news...ide-lines-prioritised-electrification-8782300

 

[Wavertreelad]

8A Rail is absolutely correct, the two cities complement each other now and will likely continue to do so for the foreseeable future.

Speaking as somebody who was born and bred in Liverpool and worked there most of my working life, I now found myself commuting to Salford on a daily basis. I did a couple of years commuting to Manchester Airport about twenty years ago and remember wondering then as I drove up and down the M62 why the peak hour traffic appeared to be so balanced? The same question rumbles around the mind still today as I make the daily stop start commute from Junc 8 to Junc 11. Now of course, it is impossible to verify that all the vehicles are travelling just between to the two cities, but the overall flow in both directions at both peaks does appear to be similar although usually moving at widely different speeds. However, what is clear from the people you talk too is there are an ever increasing number of commuters who now travel daily from both Cities and their current political boundaries to the other City or it's political boundary as their career requirements dictate.

Having observed all the recent posts about catchment areas on this thread I suspect there is probably a relatively simple answer that has little to do with Liverpool and Manchester eventually merging or not, and that is employment and mobility or rather the lack of it. From personal experience, people will usually travel to wherever a job exists, providing it is financially viable to a more local opportunity provided they are able to commute within a personally acceptable limit. Readers, may remember that Merseytravel touted the idea the people of Kirkby needed a tram link to the city centre because the area suffered from low car ownership. Even with the Merseyrail line serving the town, the proposed tram link would have largely duplicated the existing bus services into the city centre which would have likely have resulted in neither forms of public transport generating a profit, with the obvious implications.

There are parts of Liverpool and Merseyside which still suffer from low car ownership, as there are in Manchester and the surrounding towns, and it is vital in these areas that public transport is available to allow the population the mobility to commute to areas where they can follow their chosen career paths. Of course, the majority will opt for a local opportunity, assuming the prospects etc., are similar, but those with the mobility either using public transport or their own vehicle may have no other choice but to commute between the two Cities or their surrounding towns. It is these patterns that will bring the cities closer together eventually as employers and employees search for their ideal worlds. Almost inevitably, places such as Wigan and Warrington will find their borders creeping nearer the major Cities and the increasing need to improve transport routes to and from each of the major Cities.

 

[8A Rail]

Please don't question my feelings, and express your own sensibly.

Its not your feelings I'm questioning, it is your thoughts about Liverpool in general. My thoughts are sensible.

I asked along time ago ... should Merseyrail be making huge commitments over getting HS2, given this decision lies with HS2, the government and the treasury. I doubt they will give us a spur that a all for the FACTS laid out above.

You may be surprised, but Im not in favour of HS2 anyway. I just think the money could be better spend in other ways and more beneficial to the country at large including the North West. However, there is another thread for that.

Liverpool has some positives, however Manchester has an advantage and does very well. They do indeed compliment each other with a number of jobs in Manchester for people who live in Liverpool.

Manchester has the advantage, there is no doubt about that, it is a bigger area in general. However, I'm not sure that numerous people who live in Liverpool actually go to Manchester for work. Some do there is no doubt about that, but also works the other way too surprisingly.

Manchester has the Arndale and the Trafford Centre, as they chose the out of town.

I did state "City Centre" therefore both Liverpool and Manchester have similar retail area's. Not that much different between them in fact! "Trafford Centre" is out of the city centre and is access by people from all over the North West and beyond. If you are suggesting that Liverpool should have a similar "Trafford Centre", I dont think it would be economically justified. Both cities including surrounding area's have many retail parks and small town centre's too. At the end of the day jobs are being created in both cities and surrounding area's but not as much as people wish. Sadly the economical climate is still not rosy in most people's eye's who live in the north. The bottom line jobs need to be created outside the retail / leisure service sector anyway as most of them are minimum pay and part time hour contracts - there is were both cities (along with there satellite towns) need to improve upon and find employers outside this sector. I'm sure you would agree with that thought?

 

[ivanhoe]

8A Rail is absolutely correct, the two cities complement each other now and will likely continue to do so for the foreseeable future.

Speaking as somebody who was born and bred in Liverpool and worked there most of my working life, I now found myself commuting to Salford on a daily basis. I did a couple of years commuting to Manchester Airport about twenty years ago and remember wondering then as I drove up and down the M62 why the peak hour traffic appeared to be so balanced? The same question rumbles around the mind still today as I make the daily stop start commute from Junc 8 to Junc 11. Now of course, it is impossible to verify that all the vehicles are travelling just between to the two cities, but the overall flow in both directions at both peaks does appear to be similar although usually moving at widely different speeds. However, what is clear from the people you talk too is there are an ever increasing number of commuters who now travel daily from both Cities and their current political boundaries to the other City or it's political boundary as their career requirements dictate.

Having observed all the recent posts about catchment areas on this thread I suspect there is probably a relatively simple answer that has little to do with Liverpool and Manchester eventually merging or not, and that is employment and mobility or rather the lack of it. From personal experience, people will usually travel to wherever a job exists, providing it is financially viable to a more local opportunity provided they are able to commute within a personally acceptable limit. [B]Readers, may remember that Merseytravel touted the idea the people of Kirkby needed a tram link to the city centre because the area suffered from low car ownership. Even with the Merseyrail line serving the town, the proposed tram link would have largely duplicated the existing bus services into the city centre which would have likely have resulted in neither forms of public transport generating a profit, with the obvious implications. [/B.

I have highlighted the section because your analysis of just a duplication of the Kirkby rail route is not really fair. The Tram was also about re-generation of areas such as Croxteth, Norris Green, Anfield and Everton. This was the case for the tram and the route complimented the Kirkby Rail route. It would be quicker by rail from Kirkby to Town but it would speed up journeys from the other areas. It had a strong social case, something which Merseytravel now sadly lacks. Indeed I would rename Merseytravel, Merseyrail, because it's policies for other modes of transport are shallow, to see the least. Ask anybody who lives in those areas that Merseytram could have regenerated.

 

[martynbristow]

I have highlighted the section because your analysis of just a duplication of the Kirkby rail route is not really fair. The Tram was also about re-generation of areas such as Croxteth, Norris Green, Anfield and Everton. This was the case for the tram and the route complimented the Kirkby Rail route. It would be quicker by rail from Kirkby to Town but it would speed up journeys from the other areas. It had a strong social case, something which Merseytravel now sadly lacks. Indeed I would rename Merseytravel, Merseyrail, because it's policies for other modes of transport are shallow, to see the least. Ask anybody who lives in those areas that Merseytram could have regenerated.

Merseytravel do do well with buses at least now.
There is the Quality Bus Network: http://www.merseytravel.gov.uk/travelling-around/route-maps/Pages/Quality-Bus-Network.aspx
I don't use those routes anymore but it seems to be better offering buses every few minutes. However it only supports a small number of corridors.
We still lag behind on the SmartCard front

 

[po8crg]

We still lag behind on the SmartCard front

ITSO rollout has been a bit of a nightmare nationally, which is why everyone that isn't London is having problems with smart cards.

If ITSO works properly, it should be great because you'll be able to use a card from any issuer on any system (e.g. you could use a Merseytravel card in London, or a card from Norfolk on a bus in Kirkby). But that makes it much more complicated than Oyster.

 

[martynbristow]

ITSO rollout has been a bit of a nightmare nationally, which is why everyone that isn't London is having problems with smart cards.

If ITSO works properly, it should be great because you'll be able to use a card from any issuer on any system (e.g. you could use a Merseytravel card in London, or a card from Norfolk on a bus in Kirkby). But that makes it much more complicated than Oyster.

That is very promising news ... But that would be progress, Merseyrail is using the WALRUS!
They made an announcement about it years ago with strict deadlines and the rest has dried up, but we are defonatly lacking some communication on the matter. Although that progress is good, however how has this heals back the long term season tickets. My season ticket has to be replaced up to 3 times a year because its so easily destroyed ive been looking forward to a smart card

 

[po8crg]

Walrus is the Merseyrail branding for ITSO

 

[martynbristow]

Walrus is the Merseyrail branding for ITSO

Well I was politely saying thats about as far as they have got on their end, calling it something odd.
Its now out for saveaways but theres no real PR about it.

 

[First class]

For "members" which are supposed to be more knowledable than most "normals" on railway related matters, why does everyone keep referring to the PTE as Merseyrail?

Even the thread title is incorrect!!!

Merseytravel plans new stations and organises public transport within Merseyside and the borders.

Merseyrail is a TOC that runs a handful of electric routes using Class 507/508 EMUs and couldn't really care less about opening stations.

 

[fowler9]

Well I was politely saying thats about as far as they have got on their end, calling it something odd.
Its now out for saveaways but theres no real PR about it.

These things take time to roll out. It is called Octopus in Hong Kong, Oyster in London. I think picking on Walrus is a bit petty. Ha ha.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
If I may be so bold as to add I spent this afternoon traveling to Manchester Airport on one of Northerns, ahem, new 319's. To be honest it was really nice and I would welcome more of them. I also spent a few hours at the aviation park which was pleasant, however, I went to try and get some grub and a pint at the airport on he way back and I have to say that terminal 1/3 is one of the grimmest places on the planet in arrivals. JLA is much more pleasant and easy to find your way around (For some obvious reasons to be fair, it is newer and was designed that way).

 

[Wavertreelad]

I have highlighted the section because your analysis of just a duplication of the Kirkby rail route is not really fair. The Tram was also about re-generation of areas such as Croxteth, Norris Green, Anfield and Everton. This was the case for the tram and the route complimented the Kirkby Rail route. It would be quicker by rail from Kirkby to Town but it would speed up journeys from the other areas. It had a strong social case, something which Merseytravel now sadly lacks. Indeed I would rename Merseytravel, Merseyrail, because it's policies for other modes of transport are shallow, to see the least. Ask anybody who lives in those areas that Merseytram could have regenerated.

The point I was making was that the low car ownership issue was used by Merseytravel as one the reasons to justify the construction of Merseytram to Kirkby which of course would have also resulted in the line passing through parts of the City that you have highlighted which also contain large areas of low car ownership. Now I accept that usually any new public infrastructure project has a regeneration aspect and social need factored into it, but it cannot be denied that the route chosen offered little alternative to the many bus routes that it ran alongside. However, had Merseytravel opted for the Airport scheme as the first route to develop, then it may have had a better chance of success because not only would it been able to serve the airport but it could have been expanded to serve areas such as Speke and Garston as well as inner city areas such as Toxteth and Dingle all which contain low car ownership areas. Yes it would have competed with several bus routes and to a certain extent Merseyrail but it may have also been possible to reroute some of these to reduce the duplication.

 

[Olaf]

I've not gone back through all the comments, so I am not up to date, but I would point out that for the purposes of attracting inward investment, the population of Manchester's economic area is put at 6.5 million; that includes large chunks of Merseyside and North Wales. That number has been in use for sometime; it's nothing new.

As you look at the different levels of macro economics and economic activity, the size of the catchment area for any given centre is different, so there are merits for local schemes if they are scalable to the anticipated demand. However, the current administrative boundaries are an obstacle to development in the Northern Regions and thus the initiative to set-up both Rail North, and TfN, with the goal of prioritising investments that boost activity not local fiefdoms such as those of Merseyside.

In terms of building up the economic investment in the Northern Regions, it has been necessary to provide the services that attract inward investment from overseas. That has involved agglomeration around Manchester as the core, which has been going on for 10 years or more, and the growth figures reflect that.

To align the Northern Hub rail investment with the economic initiatives, schemes that improve the efficiency of the Manchester catchment must be given the priority, which has so far been the case.

HS2 to Liverpool:
In terms of HS2 to Liverpool, there is a good case for it based on the level of patronage on existing services (I think Liverpool is the second busiest source on the WCML), however I suspect it was not included in the original proposals because it would have broken the GBP 50 Billion magic number for the project as a whole. If you add in all the little schemes such as that for Liverpool, the cost of HS2 is nearer the GBP 85 Billion figure which would not have got past go.

 

[Gareth]

8A Rail is absolutely correct, the two cities complement each other now and will likely continue to do so for the foreseeable future.

In a sane country, it would go without saying. Few would argue that San Francisco and San Jose don't compliment each other. The latter's slightly larger and more inland, so has the same supposed inert advantages over San Francisco that Manchester has over Liverpool. If San Francisco was in England, it would be screwed. Or put it a better way, if California was like England, it would have its legislator based in Los Angeles, the largest city, rather than Sacramento and have totally emasculated local government so cities and counties would be at the mercy of the state government in every way. Of course, the one-size-fits-all policies of the state government would be made with Los Angeles/Southern California in mind and so that part of the state would do a whole lot better than the rest of it, especially the faraway north. Because the state is so large and the state government does most things, there'd have to be regional administration so that state policies could be carried out effectively. For the Bay Area, that'd mean regional administration from San Jose. As the decades go by, the Bay Area does rubbish economically and San Francisco especially, not helped by the fact the new high speed rail line bypasesses them and heads straight for San Jose. So the state government invents the Northern Powerhouse, which must be centred on San Jose because it's more central. Nothing of substance happens, naturally but the rhetoric fools people into believing San Jose is the "LA of the North" and that it's doing much better than it really is. Of course, years down the line, when San Jose is not much better than it was and San Francisco and much of the rest of the Bay Area is dead, people look back on the policy and wonder who actually thought it would ever work. The truth will be that it worked a treat and things played out exactly as intended.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

ITSO rollout has been a bit of a nightmare nationally, which is why everyone that isn't London is having problems with smart cards.

If ITSO works properly, it should be great because you'll be able to use a card from any issuer on any system (e.g. you could use a Merseytravel card in London, or a card from Norfolk on a bus in Kirkby). But that makes it much more complicated than Oyster.

And Oyster isn't even ITSO, if I recall correctly and will probably end up being replaced in the medium term.

Merseytravel have made a bit of a mess with the Walrus. It was no less than ten years ago that I first heard tentative plans to introduce a smart card. When it was finally announced as the Walrus and that its introduction was near, the roll out date just jumped back and back.

I've been looking forward to it for years, as it should, in theory, make my life a lot easier. However, this first incarnation of it will actually make my life more difficult. All the Walrus is, for now at least, is just an electronic Saveaway ticket. I normally buy the current paper Saveaways in bulk from the main travel centre in town, so that I can just dig one out and scratch the date on it, on any given day. I do this because I don't want to have to meander my journey to the shop in the morning to buy one, which is not on the way to the bus stop. Now, I'll have no choice, I'll need to load the Saveaway onto the Walrus Card in the shop every day. No, you can't load multiple ones onto it or top it up online. How stupid is that? We've been topping up Pay & Go phone SIMs online for over a decade, so it's hardly cutting edge technology.

It seems Merseytravel have struggled with the rollout because of a few factors. I recall reading they just went for the cheapest of everything, which can be a false economy. I'm sure getting different private bus companies to co-operate with the scheme was a headache and I'm not even sure the rail TOCs other than Merseyrail are on board (though this is something that even took TfL a while to get sorted). I think the biggest headache is the smörgåsbord of different tickets. There's Saveaways, Solos, Trios, Railpasses, of course, the England-wide over-60 pass and the plethora of different zones, which are complicated, often overlap even three-way and can be bought as weekly, monthly annually and sometimes termly. I think this needs to be rationalised and simplified. I want to be able to use my smart card without thinking, so long as it's in credit. I don't want to have to worry about loading various tickets onto it and have to consider what areas I'll be travelling in, how often and at what time of day. The Walrus should be making things simpler, but in the short term, it's going to be yet another complication.

 

[ivanhoe]

The point I was making was that the low car ownership issue was used by Merseytravel as one the reasons to justify the construction of Merseytram to Kirkby which of course would have also resulted in the line passing through parts of the City that you have highlighted which also contain large areas of low car ownership. Now I accept that usually any new public infrastructure project has a regeneration aspect and social need factored into it, but it cannot be denied that the route chosen offered little alternative to the many bus routes that it ran alongside. However, had Merseytravel opted for the Airport scheme as the first route to develop, then it may have had a better chance of success because not only would it been able to serve the airport but it could have been expanded to serve areas such as Speke and Garston as well as inner city areas such as Toxteth and Dingle all which contain low car ownership areas. Yes it would have competed with several bus routes and to a certain extent Merseyrail but it may have also been possible to reroute some of these to reduce the duplication.

I'm sorry, but you are probably a Southender as I am, but North Liverpool desperately needs a better infrastructure and buses are not the answer alone. Liverpool needs more people paying council taxes from new build schemes and this would have helped. Obviously, the Government at the time disagreed.

 

[Camden]

HS2 to Liverpool:
In terms of HS2 to Liverpool, there is a good case for it based on the level of patronage on existing services (I think Liverpool is the second busiest source on the WCML), however I suspect it was not included in the original proposals because it would have broken the GBP 50 Billion magic number for the project as a whole. If you add in all the little schemes such as that for Liverpool, the cost of HS2 is nearer the GBP 85 Billion figure which would not have got past go.

Incorrect (and incorrect on all your other points too, but I think that your motivations there have been pointed to before).

The "P95" figure, including the trains whose £7.5bn cost is normally ignored, was already £50.1bn. The actual figure which is minus contingency is nowhere near £50bn (or indeed £42.6bn). So Liverpool's HS2 < £2bn line could be achieved and the total budget would still be £50.1bn (£42.6bn). Budget was not the reason for its exclusion. And as you've discounted patronage what other reasons are there.

If only it could be funded by woolly excuses, Mancuniaun belittlement and cock-eyed urban theories, its "little scheme" could probably be built right now.

 

[Gareth]

The point I was making was that the low car ownership issue was used by Merseytravel as one the reasons to justify the construction of Merseytram to Kirkby which of course would have also resulted in the line passing through parts of the City that you have highlighted which also contain large areas of low car ownership. Now I accept that usually any new public infrastructure project has a regeneration aspect and social need factored into it, but it cannot be denied that the route chosen offered little alternative to the many bus routes that it ran alongside. However, had Merseytravel opted for the Airport scheme as the first route to develop, then it may have had a better chance of success because not only would it been able to serve the airport but it could have been expanded to serve areas such as Speke and Garston as well as inner city areas such as Toxteth and Dingle all which contain low car ownership areas. Yes it would have competed with several bus routes and to a certain extent Merseyrail but it may have also been possible to reroute some of these to reduce the duplication.

I respectfully disagree, for the most part. I had various reservations about the Merseytram scheme but the basic idea was not as redundant as you imply. Yes, the first line went to Kirkby, a place which already has Merseyrail, which a tram could not possibly beat in terms of journey times to downtown. However, the intermediate areas served were very different. Tuebrook doesn't have a rail connection, neither does Norris Green or Croxteth. East Liverpool is terrible for public transport. Not only is there little in the way of rail services but the buses Arriva insist on using are small single deckers that are like cattle trucks in the rush hour. Add to that the journey time, as West Derby Road is rammed pretty much all the way up its length. I used to do West Derby-Queen Square on a 12/13/15 around 8 in the morning. No exaggeration, the journey often took around an hour. To consider how ridiculous this is, Huyton's much further out than West Derby and you can get into Lime Street in under 20 minutes on the fast train.

I hear a lot of people make the airport tram argument. The thing is, few people would want to go on a tram to and from the airport. It'd be slow, as the tram would stop at various places in Speke, Garston, Aigburth and Toxteth and not particularly comfortable, as trams are generally designed for local traffic doing relatively short 'hop on, hop off' journeys and are narrow with hard seats and little luggage space. The airport needs a rail link, though this could perhaps take the form of a tram-train, if the technology takes off; running from Lime Street to South Parkway and then maybe on to a dedicated light rail section around the outside of the Speke estate.

Merseytram had two big failings in my opinion. Firstly, whilst the route along West Derby road made perfect sense, Kirkby was not the logical destination. None of the buses that run along West Derby Road go to Kirkby, as it's not the natural route. The 12/13 go to Stockbridge and the 18 goes to Croxteth Park. The 15 meanders a bit, going to Huyton but it's really two services tacked together (City Centre-West Derby & West Derby-Huyton). They should've just replaced the 18 bus service in a first phase, with a second going to Stockbridge, thus replacing the 12/13. Yes, this would mean the depot couldn't be on the Easts Lancs but the route should determine the depot, not the other way around. A lot of this was political (much like the heavily skewed HS2 route), not just because Kirkby is relatively poor and would release certain funding but also because it was in another local authority.

The second problem I had with Merseytram is that it was designed more like a 'light rail' service than a more urban tram, which I think the route suited more. I heard it dubbed "Merseyrail Light" on a couple of occasions. Some provisional stations seemed rather far apart, the stations were to be very long (in order to accommodate two trams at the same times) and looked like rail stations, plus the proposed alignment made no sense in places. For example, instead of dualling the far bottom end of the road and running the tram through the middle, they wanted to keep the single carriageway and run the tram on the new side. Further down the road, the tram was to swap sides, which made no sense and on the dual carriageway part, again; instead of running the trams down the middle, they wanted to covert part of the road to a single carriageway and run the tram down the redundant side.

So, the basic idea was good but it was poorly thought out, in my opinion.

 

[prod_pep]

I know exactly what you mean re: the 12/13 and 15 bus routes. You'll probably be glad to know that both routes are due to receive brand new double decker buses this coming autumn, which will greatly increase the capacity on these busy routes.

 

[Gareth]

Oh great. Not before time too. It's been a ridiculous situation for a good number of years now (essentially, since Arriva bought out MTL in 1998).

 

[flypie]

I've not gone back through all the comments, so I am not up to date, but I would point out that for the purposes of attracting inward investment, the population of Manchester's economic area is put at 6.5 million; that includes large chunks of Merseyside and North Wales.

Where did you pluck that number from?

Regarding #hs2 etc and Merseyside it worth looking at this and searching for Liverpool & Merseyside http://www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/SN07082/railways-hs2-phase-2-beyond