New Undergroud Station in Church Street?

[Waterways]

Liverpool Central Masterplan

Phase 5 - Provision of additional platform Capacity

The long term solution may require the provision of additional platforms. This type of solution is going to require significant investment in order to create not only the additional platform capacity but also the additional rail tunnels track, electrification and signalling alterations necessary.

There are two options that have been considered for this phase which are:-

* Provision of an additional platform at Central Station.
* Relocation of the station.


The potential to provide a further platform at Central station may be possible. During the construction of the loop and link network an extra tunnel entrance was created at the Moorfields end of the platform. This has the potential to be excavated into a full tunnel which would provide a line that would run directly below the existing concourse through to the rear of the station. Considerable detailed study would be required to determine how cost effective this solution would be and how disruptive it would be to the operation of the existing station.

The option of relocation of the station is also possible. The railway between Central and Moorfields runs directly down the centre of Church Street. There would be an opportunity to excavate down to the railway tunnel and create 2 new wide platforms that would be sized for future passenger growth. The construction methodology would be similar to the construction of Conway Park Station. Whilst this option appears to more realistic there would be considerable issues regarding gaining approvals to such a large excavation in the heart of the city centre and also the need to secure land on which to construct the station entrance and ticket office. A new station at the corner of Church Street and Ranelagh Street could also be linked to the existing Wirral line platform.

These long term solutions are likely to be part of an overall network capacity assessment that will be required looking not only at station infrastructure but overall network capacity in terms of use of new rolling stock, train length/vehicle capacity, line speed, train frequency and overall train timetable.

By progressing the Masterplan in the proposed phases it is anticipated that even if a decision is made to construct an additional platform then the works carried out to the Wirral Line, Concourse and Northern Line platforms will complement this proposal and not detract from the previous phases and the significant investment made.

[mikewturner]

Hi Waterways

Are these your own thoughts or are you quoting from official documentation?

Regards

Mike

[Waterways]

Hi Waterways

Are these your own thoughts or are you quoting from official documentation?

Regards

Mike

quoting. but it is their thoughts not proposals

[Waterways]

There was originally a proposal to build a an underground station on the Northern Line at Paradise St/Whitechapel way. This was to serve Liverpool One. It was abandoned as they said trams would serve Liverpool One. So rapid transit Merseyrail suffers because of a ridiculous outdated tram scheme.

A new station will take the pressure off overcrowded Central station.

This is cheaper and offers more than moving Central station a few hundred yards down Church St.

[merseywail]

''During the construction of the loop and link network an extra tunnel entrance was created at the Moorfields end of the platform.'' I have never seen this extra tunnel entrance, where is it ? Do they mean the space to the left (running in from Moorfields), where the signal box once stood ? ''There was originally a proposal to build a an underground station on the Northern Line at Paradise St/Whitechapel way. This was to serve Liverpool One. It was abandoned as they said trams would serve Liverpool One.'' Moorfields is better for Liverpool one than Central, & a lot of passengers for it now alight there, myself included. What is needed is better signage to get more passengers to use Moorfields & not Central. Why cause more disruption & demolition on an unneeded station ? A cost/benefit analysis would show this. A better option would be a subway link to Moofields, But i doubt even that would ever get approval now.

[Waterways]

''During the construction of the loop and link network an extra tunnel entrance was created at the Moorfields end of the platform.'' I have never seen this extra tunnel entrance, where is it ? Do they mean the space to the left (running in from Moorfields), where the signal box once stood ?


It is a mystery to me as well.



''There was originally a proposal to build a an underground station on the Northern Line at Paradise St/Whitechapel way. This was to serve Liverpool One. It was abandoned as they said trams would serve Liverpool One.'' Moorfields is better for Liverpool one than Central, & a lot of passengers for it now alight there, myself included. What is needed is better signage to get more passengers to use Moorfields & not Central. Why cause more disruption & demolition on an unneeded station ? A cost/benefit analysis would show this. A better option would be a subway link to Moofields, But i doubt even that would ever get approval now.

Liverpool One wanted, and were promised, direct rail transport to the complex. Moorefieds and Central are just too far. A station between them with long connecting tunnels from platform to Paradise St would alleviate both stations.

The original 1886 tunnel from James St to Central is still used for shunting. It is proposed to use this tunnel to have direct Wirral Lines (Wrexham included) to John Lennon Airport. This tunnel is nearer to Liverpool One and maybe this could cope, but passenger changes would be needed from the Liverpool side, direct from Wirral.

A city centre/docks monorail is by far the best bet with direct connections to Merseyrail. It can then run right into Liverpool One and just about anywhere. What is the cost of trams/new station? Put that towards a monorail and many birds are killed with one stone.

[merseywail]

''A city centre/docks monorail is by far the best bet with direct connections to Merseyrail. It can then run right into Liverpool One and just about anywhere. What is the cost of trams/new station? Put that towards a monorail and many birds are killed with one stone'' One for the far future i think .The best we can hope for now is an enlarged Central sta, and subways with travelator's from Central & Moorfields, to Liverpool one. Public transport allways gets a raw deal in times like these. Happend to Merseyrail in the 70's & you can guarantee it will happen again

[Waterways]

''A city centre/docks monorail is by far the best bet with direct connections to Merseyrail. It can then run right into Liverpool One and just about anywhere. What is the cost of trams/new station? Put that towards a monorail and many birds are killed with one stone'' One for the far future i think .The best we can hope for now is an enlarged Central sta, and subways with travelator's from Central & Moorfields, to Liverpool one. Public transport allways gets a raw deal in times like these. Happend to Merseyrail in the 70's & you can guarantee it will happen again

They are determined to ignore the downtown and inner city rail infrastructure to enhance the outers of Merseyrail - to get those ridiculous trams in. Downtown is where focus should be, not the outer regions of Merseyrail. The only outer part to be extended is a link to John Lennon airport around the back of the Jaguar factory beside the Everton FC training ground - a branch off the Manchester line after Halewood station.

[merseywail]

Merseytravel can try to ignore the downtown as much as they like, but the government holds the purse strings. There's no votes in public transport, so they won't see a penny for any new rail projects, or for there beloved trams! Now as for new roads ? Well there's lots of votes there, am sure they can find some cash for them.

[Cyon]

What's wrong with James Street for Liverpool one? Up James Street, through Derby Square, behind the Law Courts and you're there.

Are people getting that lazy these days?

[SKie]

Aye, Wirral line dosent need to be linked to a new station, James street is fine, though they could do with adding more signage to get people to use it more for that purpose.

While using the link tunnel for services would be nice, it isnt practical with the amount of trains already running in and out of central upper level (and especially with central being overcrowded already, more services there wouldnt help)

A new station between moorfields and central would be ideal, especially if it was by paradise street (though might be too close to the paradise street junction then...). Another platform at central might open up the option of using the wapping or victoria tunnels, as the new platform would be on the correct side to simply continue on and east towards the old tunnels.

[Scouseinmanc]

I don't think that putting a station in between Central & Moorfields is feasible. They are only 2 mins apart as it is.
Perhaps enlarging Central would be the best option here - actually, sod it - the whole thing needs a rebuild.

[Waterways]

I don't think that putting a station in between Central & Moorfields is feasible. They are only 2 mins apart as it is.

In London stations are very close in the City. It is feasible as it was previously proposed, but silly trams meant it was cancelled.

[Scouseinmanc]

In London stations are very close in the City. It is feasible as it was previously proposed, but silly trams meant it was cancelled.

But central London is huge & actually warrants so many stations & them being close together. Liverpool city centre is tiny in comparison, so I really don't see the need myself.
Although I would like to see a new station round the St James area, serving Upper Parliment St / Park Road & perhaps another in between Moorfields & Sandhills, serving Vauxhall & the waterloo Dock complex.

[ChrisGeorge]

But central London is huge & actually warrants so many stations & them being close together. Liverpool city centre is tiny in comparison, so I really don't see the need myself.


Aye, what's wrong with Shanks's pony? An able person can walk round central Liverpool in a relatively short time.

Chris

[Waterways]

But central London is huge & actually warrants so many stations & them being close together. Liverpool city centre is tiny in comparison, so I really don't see the need myself.


You have missed it.:) In areas of high passenger congestion it is needed irrespective of overall city size. In the City of London on the same road they are only a few hundred yards apart.

Church St, Liverpool One and around is an area much like parts of London in traffic use.

In Paris the stations are so close, you can see other stations looking down the tunnel. I once counted 4 stations. They use the Metro like bus stops.



Although I would like to see a new station round the St James area, serving Upper Parliment St / Park Road & perhaps another in between Moorfields & Sandhills, serving Vauxhall & the waterloo Dock complex.

St. James' is waiting and there, and earmarked for opening one day. When the area becomes more built up then it will open.

Also, Waterloo Dock, at the end of the Waterloo Tunnel and Northern Line is a prime candidate.

[Waterways]

Aye, what's wrong with Shanks's pony? An able person can walk round central Liverpool in a relatively short time.

Chris

The idea is to get those out of town or on the outskirts right to where they want to be. No one wants to carry lots of shopping bags a long way, but if a station is right there...

[robt]

To avoid any confusion, any new station would be to REPLACE Liverpool Central, not in addition to it.

[Waterways]

To avoid any confusion, any new station would be to REPLACE Liverpool Central, not in addition to it.

The station on the Northern Line at Paradise St was an extra station.

[robt]

The station on the Northern Line at Paradise St was an extra station.

But this one is not.

[jc_everton]

Talk of replacing is Central is just ridiculous. Its location is still great, after all the developments that have taken place over the last few decades, its location is still important.
It really isn't that far from Liverpool One, its ideal for Bold Street and the surrounding shops and nightlife, good for students of the Community Colleges and some university buildings such as John Foster, but not great.
The station simply needs redevelopment. How they go about doing that is their job -but they're probably too lazy to study this. The land above Central, which is still lying derelict, but has potential redevelopment plans, will allow major redevelopment to take place. This should happen sooner rather than later, as that land has been eyed up for a number of years by developers.

The gaps, such as linkages to Liverpool One, the University district, London Road, Hope St etc should be filled in with trams. Ignore Waterways' anti-tram propaganda - he dislikes them for purely subjective reasons (noisy, vibrating, visually obtrusive - nonsense). We've been through this before, and although monorail would be great for the city centre, actual urban monorail systems are rare, and if we were to get one, we couldn't just get an Alton Towers style one - the city is not a fairground, and city centre monorail systems, which are of higher quality will cost mega millions. They also have wind issues - due to the nature of their design, they are very sensitive to strong winds - not ideal in a city such as Liverpool. But, food for thought nevertheless.
I agree the other tunnels can be reused in some way - without a shadow of a doubt we should not neglect them. They too can help fill in the gaps. Central's problem is the over-crowding, not its location. And relocating it is not the answer.

[Waterways]

The station simply needs redevelopment.


The reason to move it is that it is too small.



The gaps, such as linkages to Liverpool One, the University district, London Road, Hope St etc should be filled in with trams. Ignore Waterways' anti-tram propaganda - he dislikes them for purely subjective reasons (noisy, vibrating, visually obtrusive - nonsense).


There is about 4 miles of tunnels awaiting recommission that can service what you outline, so why waste money on trams?



I agree the other tunnels can be reused in some way - without a shadow of a doubt we should not neglect them. They too can help fill in the gaps. Central's problem is the over-crowding, not its location. And relocating it is not the answer.

Ahhhh, at last you got it all. :)

If inter-city and and other out of Merseyside traffic increases, Lime St will not cope. That may mean re-opening Exchange Station, as Central will be built on. The Circle Line I outlined would take St Helens traffic away from Lime St giving more space, and means even dual pickup Manchester trains could enter Central too. Or take the Manchester trains down the Wapping Tunnel to a station at Kings/Queens Docks.

Or making Central so big it will cope with Merseyrail and out of region rail traffic too, to assist Lime Street.

Many options. The tunnels have to be brought onto Merseyrail to regenerate the inner-cities and expand the centre too.

[jc_everton]

Nah that's just defeatist to say Central is too small to redevelop. A bit of engineering craft and innovation would find some sort of solution. Its a typical "cannot do" mentality that holds this country back. Or should I say, "cannot do this unless it is financially viable".
Central is underground, I'm not an engineer, but its not as if we're building a whole new underground station from scratch here - we're expanding it. Again, how the engineers go about doing this is up to them.
Closing down Central would be a real loss, and another example of rail transport being pushed aside, unless of course, significant investment was ploughed into a brand new station or reopening the grandiose Exchange Station. But to simply close down Central because its "getting in the way of development" and push it up the road to create a complete underground station smacks of lack of ambition.
At risk of sounding "traditionalist", what has happened to design standards? Why have we gone so far backward over the past 50 years? To save money, obviously, but pride of place and design standards are so low now, I'd hate to see a new plastic underground station open in place of Central. Ok, Central is not as grand it was 100 years ago, but still, it is fairly unique in principle. In reality, it is stuck in the 1970s, it is dark, smelly and I think Joe Riley hit the nail on the head when he said its like something out of "Ghost-train" ride in a fairground. There has never been any attempt to improve its design. So, the toilets have been renovated... we now have electronic gates... but what of the station itself? It's boring, dark, plastic and has absolutely no character. What I'm saying is unique is the two ideally located entrances and the fact that it is not very "underground", it's very shallow, and is also surrounded by some terrific listed buildings (which could also do with better maintenance and care), although it would be fair to say that wherever the station is located, it will be near some listed buildings!

One thing I've never been quite sure of though is the old "high level" line... How much higher was the old line (running underneath Berry Street) compared to the line today? The old line must have ran very shallow beneath Berry Street yes? Or was it simply excavated deeper, so now the tunnel is actually quite deep and vertically spacious?
I'm not sure how possible this suggestion would be - but retaining the old high level and creating a new tunnel underneath Hardman Street to the Wapping tunnel sounds a great idea. This way we'd have three levels of rail, and we can divert some of the easterly traffic onto this new high level. Assuming a tunnel link between Hardman St and the Wapping tunnel is viable, why not give consider this option? It could also open up other regional and national links.

[Scouseinmanc]

I've suggested on another forum, possibly rebuilding Exchange Station.

I'm not entirely sure that building another platform at Central would solve the capacity problem. It may possibly do in the short term, but I don't think it would be too long before the station again started experiencing problems. Especially if Merseyrail do act upon their thoughts of expanding their network over the next few years. An extra platform isn't going to be sufficient. If Merseyrail are to go ahead with their expansion, where would they run them into? These new services could also terminate in the new Exchange station.
I really do think that the 'new Exchange' will alleviate any current & future capacity problems & may also bring a lot more life into the business district of the city centre, which was lost when Exchange closed & Moorfields opened. Especially now that we have so many new buildings along the river front, in the business district & with the opening of Liverpool One.
Granted, the new station doesn't have to be anywhere near on the same scale as the old station was, but there is an awful lot of vacant land that could be put to much better use.
Of course, this is only chatter & written in my own humble opinion. Still it would be interesting to hear everyone's thoughts... "

[andyk]

Expanding Central will be an expensive,long and disruptive task.Given that most of the problems stem from the need for two out of every three trains to run forward before a new departure,perhaps any available funding would be better spent on establishing the link to the Wapping Tunnel ?Trains could then run-through Central on their way to St.Helens /Wigan or even Manchester (dual-voltage ?).Many London tube stations handle a train every few minutes and despite Central being an island platform,I'm sure it could do the same.

Another idea:An eventual link to John Lennon Airport could use some of the available space on the High Level site.A single platform would probably suffice whatever the configaration chosen,or even as a route for tram-trains to gain access to the City.

[jc_everton]

I take your point, but the only reason why I'd like to see it reopened is because it such a glorious building, both from the inside and the outside.
Its also a shame the old line (ground-level) has been built on, but then it really would only be a destination, as opposed to a stop like Moorfields.
But as you're hoping for Exchange to be the site of a new underground station, its a bit pointless, as Moorfields is so close.

As regards, Central's expansion, a new platform or two would certainly help ease congestion in the station, but what is really needed is more rolling stock - we need longer trains and greater frequency, e.g every 10 mins at peak time, as opposed to every 15. Getting on at Moorfields can sometimes be an absolute nightmare. not only is the platform packed to the rafters, the train itself is already packed from Central. Even when it is 6-car, it can still not be enough. It must also be remembered that the service is not a rapid metro with stops every 10 yards like in Paris (Waterways, 2009), therefore people should expect to be able to sit down, not penned in like a chicken battery, especially as people are paying good money to use this service.


I really do think that the 'new Exchange' will alleviate any current & future capacity problems & may also bring a lot more life into the business district of the city centre, which was lost when Exchange closed & Moorfields opened.

Not sure about this. What exactly was lost when Exchange closed? Moorfields is still a thriving business district.

Regardless of all this "What do we about capacity" business, the whole network needs to change. There is a reluctance to really move things forward - the whole "if its not broke, dont fix it" mentality. In reality, the network isn't that bad, but capacity is an issue, which is a result of rising rail patronage. Merseytravel have an excellent opportunity to take the network by the scruff of the neck and take it up to another level, but they'll point to a lack of funds. Therefore, the issue of rail travel needs to be moved higher up local and national government agendas. Again, there is a reluctance to do this, as the government believe everything is hunky-dory, so don't mess with it until it becomes a real problem.
But this is the problem, the culture today is purely "reactive". Planning is not pro-active, transport is not pro-active, and so on. Everything is a reaction to a lack of quality planning and vision. Urban renewal is a reaction to years of poor leadership and poor planning.
There are many areas of land and buildings in Liverpool which need to go, but everything is so slow and jobsworth.... like the Concourse Tower, delayed by over 6 months because of the spider? Come on, get a grip. Where do their priorities lie? In culture and tourism? Its an insult.

[Scouseinmanc]

JCE - I can understand why Both Central High Level & Exchange were closed back in the 70's, but to echo your point, we do live in a reactive way & not proactive. There was no thought for increasing numbers & traffic congestion which we are now having to deal with & of course, will only get worse. So because of long distance trains being diverted to Lime Street in the 60's, both stations became more or less redundant & it was only a matter of time before they were closed. Central would have closed a lot earlier, had it not been for the remaining Gateacre service (which incidentally, was supposed to be reinstated after completion of the Loop & Link).

I'm not sure if the old Central High Level site could ever revert back to its former use, as I'm sure I read somewhere that the tunnel at the back of the site doesn't actually go anywhere now (due to the development of the Loop & Link). You can walk to the end of it, but then it stops & you can actually see the Northern Line tunnel running below.

So this only leaves the land at the back of Mercury Court that could be utilised & hence my suggestion for the rebuild of Exchange.

In response to your question re. the thriving business district, I personally think that it's now a shadow of it's fomer self. When Exchange was open, it brought a great deal more life to the area. It now feels quite desolate. Reopening it would bring a lot more life back.

[robt]

I take your point, but the only reason why I'd like to see it reopened is because it such a glorious building, both from the inside and the outside.

That is the worst possible reason to reopen a station.


As regards, Central's expansion, a new platform or two would certainly help ease congestion in the station, but what is really needed is more rolling stock - we need longer trains and greater frequency, e.g every 10 mins at peak time, as opposed to every 15. Getting on at Moorfields can sometimes be an absolute nightmare. not only is the platform packed to the rafters, the train itself is already packed from Central. Even when it is 6-car, it can still not be enough.

I don't think you realise how lucky you are, you really should try some other cities transport systems in the rush hour - or even 2 car units out of Lime Street than you can't actually get on because it is full. I have never ever once seen that level of over crowding at Moorfields, let alone every single day!

At the very most, all Central needs is two new bay platforms for trains terminating there. More stock is a totally different sibject and one that is being sorted out both in the short and long terms.


Regardless of all this "What do we about capacity" business, the whole network needs to change. There is a reluctance to really move things forward - the whole "if its not broke, dont fix it" mentality. In reality, the network isn't that bad, but capacity is an issue, which is a result of rising rail patronage. Merseytravel have an excellent opportunity to take the network by the scruff of the neck and take it up to another level, but they'll point to a lack of funds. Therefore, the issue of rail travel needs to be moved higher up local and national government agendas. Again, there is a reluctance to do this, as the government believe everything is hunky-dory, so don't mess with it until it becomes a real problem.

Whilst I don't agree with the majority of things the Government do, I don't think that is entirely fair. Trains are being ordered to replace some which are not life expired, and as we speak there are people measuring sidings and calculating where overhead gantry masts will do within depots. Things the public don't hear about because the media is so negative about rail transport.

[merseywail]

There is room at central low level for extra platforms, but it would need major rebuilding, & a few years of closure, as would a station at Paradise St. A more simple option is to have staggered platforms & better passenger flow. Extending the Garston bound platform beyond the emergency exit. with a new exit for passengers leaving central. And extending the southport platform beyond where the lift is, with a better entrance for passengers for the north end services, would split passenger flow. Also have a passenger holding area. This works very well at Manchester piccadilly station's platform's 13 & 14.

[robt]

There is room at central low level for extra platforms, but it would need major rebuilding, & a few years of closure, as would a station at Paradise St. A more simple option is to have staggered platforms & better passenger flow. Extending the Garston bound platform beyond the emergency exit. with a new exit for passengers leaving central. And extending the southport platform beyond where the lift is, with a better entrance for passengers for the north end services, would split passenger flow. Also have a passenger holding area. This works very well at Manchester piccadilly station's platform's 13 & 14.

That is a suggestion made in the latest RUS.

[jc_everton]

Robt - your dismissal of design considerations sums up the low standards of design in modern Britain. There is no reason to reopen Exchange Station other than the fact it is a fantastic, unique building. What might be a good idea is to use it as a temporary station while Moorfields receives a much needed facelift, and possible expansion.

Your second dismissal of me "not knowing how lucky I am" is again, tosh. I may not have seen the busiest train stations in the world, but as far as I'm concerned, you WILL struggle to get a seat if you get on at Moorfields at peak time - and this is simply not good enough. I don't care about 2 carriages to Manchester at this moment in time - thats for another day. Although that is a disgrace too.

Merseywail - very good thinking out the box - this is what is required here, but its not our jobs to solve the logistical land problem of Central. We look at Central and think "och, that can't be worked on, its impossible!" - it's defeatist and negative. For every problem, there's a solution, thats how Merseytravel should think. Too many people are content with mediocrity and giving in at the first stage. This also applies to design standards. They've fell so low over the past 50 years or so, it is painful. Imagination has all but vanished. And don't anyone come out with all that "get in the real world" malarkey. Tosh. This whole country could do with a major kick up the backside - maybe future terrorist attacks might spark that. Wake people up a bit.

[baldyman26]

What you all forget is that in he Governments eyes when it comes to Transport, Liverpool is a small insignificant little dot on the map. There probably in our lifetime will not be any new city centre stations, maybe a few minor refurbishments, but nothing new. We can't even get new trains, just give a lick of paint to the old ones. Should it not be up to the Liverpool People to lobby govenment, put pressure on our USELESS MP'S, to try to get something done.

[robt]

Robt - your dismissal of design considerations sums up the low standards of design in modern Britain. There is no reason to reopen Exchange Station other than the fact it is a fantastic, unique building.

If my statement summed up low design standards, yours must sum up low intelligence surely. A station MUST be functional, design comes after function, and that is not to say of course that you can't have both. Exchange only has beauty (which is subjective anyway).


Your second dismissal of me "not knowing how lucky I am" is again, tosh. I may not have seen the busiest train stations in the world, but as far as I'm concerned, you WILL struggle to get a seat if you get on at Moorfields at peak time - and this is simply not good enough.

I didn't say you wouldn't get a seat. A seat is a bonus - you have no entitlement to one whatsoever.


I don't care about 2 carriages to Manchester at this moment in time - thats for another day. Although that is a disgrace too.

As I thought - you only actually care about the line you use and you don't look at the bigger picture (christ, I sound like Waterways there lol).

[jc_everton]

Well I explained to you why reopening Exchange was pointless, so there was some consideration towards function... So that's point 1.

Point 2...
No-one is entitled to a seat?! Jesus, your standards really are low!

This. Is. England.

This country has stooped so low... now we can't even expect a basic service, such as a seat on a train?! If our railways were nationalised and we paid nothing to use the trains, maybe, maybe... But for the money we pay, I could easily my use car to get into town... and sometimes (when I feel appropriate) I do. I expect to sit down on a train whether I'm in England, Poland, Ukraine, Italy... it makes no odds. I'm sure this is an issue that people all over the world get rightly annoyed with. But as This Is England, not Uganda, I expect a seat, no matter how long or short the journey. And thats down to one thing.... Standards.

Dog excrement all over the inner city streets? Again, standards. Its a vicious circle... kids grow up in rubbish dumps, it becomes the norm. Kids grow up with sub-standard building design, sub-standard public transport, clone towns... it becomes the norm.

Point 3... I've just took the "big picture" and nailed its balls to the wall.

[robt]

Well I explained to you why reopening Exchange was pointless, so there was some consideration towards function... So that's point 1.

Point 2...
No-one is entitled to a seat?! Jesus, your standards really are low!

This. Is. England.

This country has stooped so low... now we can't even expect a basic service, such as a seat on a train?! If our railways were nationalised and we paid nothing to use the trains, maybe, maybe... But for the money we pay, I could easily my use car to get into town... and sometimes (when I feel appropriate) I do. I expect to sit down on a train whether I'm in England, Poland, Ukraine, Italy... it makes no odds. I'm sure this is an issue that people all over the world get rightly annoyed with. But as This Is England, not Uganda, I expect a seat, no matter how long or short the journey. And thats down to one thing.... Standards.

Dog excrement all over the inner city streets? Again, standards. Its a vicious circle... kids grow up in rubbish dumps, it becomes the norm. Kids grow up with sub-standard building design, sub-standard public transport, clone towns... it becomes the norm.

Point 3... I've just took the "big picture" and nailed its balls to the wall.

Thankyou for judging my 'standards':rolleyes: Of which you actually know nothing. It doesn't matter what my standards are or what my (or your) opinion is, it is an indisputable fact that you have no entitlement to a seat on a train - and always has been the case.

[Kev]

Keep it friendly peeps :PDT11

[jc_everton]

Well you've certainly done a good job of bringing your standards into question, thats for sure. To not expect a seat on an English train is ludicrous. It may be realistic, but to call it a "bonus" is a sad reflection of Modern England.

As I said, This Is England. Once a proud nation, now we have situations where people cannot board a train because it's too full. As a result, members of the public like your good self believe getting a seat is a "bonus". Believe it or not, I sometimes have to get this Manc-L'pool train home at peak time, and I've seen it for myself, just how rammed it gets, and in the summer it really is unpleasant. I'm not disputing the crowdedness of these trains, nor should you dispute the same problem with peak time, 3-car trains on the Northern Line. A similar joke.

My point is quite clear, by accepting the situation as "the norm", people become accustomed to it, and standing up is just "accepted". But it shouldn't be. You pay good money, you expect good service. That goes with pretty much everything in life. Surely you can see this is a valid point? And how this mentality spreads into other aspects of modern life, like a cancer.

[robt]

Well you've certainly done a good job of bringing your standards into question, thats for sure. To not expect a seat on an English train is ludicrous. It may be realistic, but to call it a "bonus" is a sad reflection of Modern England.

As I said, This Is England. Once a proud nation, now we have situations where people cannot board a train because it's too full. As a result, members of the public like your good self believe getting a seat is a "bonus". Believe it or not, I sometimes have to get this Manc-L'pool train home at peak time, and I've seen it for myself, just how rammed it gets, and in the summer it really is unpleasant. I'm not disputing the crowdedness of these trains, nor should you dispute the same problem with peak time, 3-car trains on the Northern Line. A similar joke.

My point is quite clear, by accepting the situation as "the norm", people become accustomed to it, and standing up is just "accepted". But it shouldn't be. You pay good money, you expect good service. That goes with pretty much everything in life. Surely you can see this is a valid point? And how this mentality spreads into other aspects of modern life, like a cancer.

You are really having a good rant aren't you? :rolleyes:

I have not brought my standards into it whatsoever, I have stated some facts which you don't like. You would have more credibility if you didn't take things out of context and then exagerate them to try and make a 'point'. Especially when you try to make it personal.

I certainly will dispute your point. There is a vast, vast difference between being on a crowded train and not being able to get on one at all. Incidently, I have not mentioned Manchester to Liverpool peak services at all, so feel free to compare them to whatever you like.

No doubt you will reply with another tirade of thinly disguised personal insults, so I won't rise to them, this will be my last word on the subject until any more interesting or valid points are raised. Go on - have the last word.

[Scouseinmanc]

Hellfire - didn't expect an all out war..!

Just to clarify; when you buy a train ticket - it is indeed for a seat. I have no problem standing if the journey is purely local. However, I would not hesitate to find a seat in 1st Class, if there were none available in standard. I really don't think that majority of passengers woud even bother buying a ticket, if they thought it was a free for all.

Getting back to the point tho, it appears that most usrs wish to see a major rebuild of Central. What then would be the feasibility of utilitising some of the space on the old High Level site?

[andyk]

I am a frequent visiter to these pages,but only an ocassional contributor.
I see little point in making a point of view when it will either be ignored or condemned without reason by the few people who monopolise the forum.

I made a suggestion that part of the Central High Level site could be used as a terminus of a tram-train service from John Lennon Airport.No more far-fetched than the stuff Waterways has been promoting for longer than I care to remember.I'm convinced that people travelling from the airport to the City-centre would prefer to arrive in an airy-environemnt,rather than the over-crowed ,dank space that is Central.

A single-track spur would be relatively easy to construct with a realignement
of the existing link.The tunnel was constructed for three tracks.

Some posts on YoLiverpool give rise to hours of happy day-dreaming of how things could be.Please don't ruin things with your pathetic *****yness.

[Scouseinmanc]

I see little point in making a point of view when it will either be ignored or condemned without reason by the few people who monopolise the forum.
Some posts on YoLiverpool give rise to hours of happy day-dreaming of how things could be.Please don't ruin things with your pathetic *****yness.

Here, here Andy, quite agree :)

You tend to find on a lot of threads (not just on this site either), that you make a suggestion & people who think they're in the know, dismiss it entirely & come up with a 'far more suitable' answer.

I stated on Skyscraper City, that my idea was pure pie in the sky. I don't think for one minute that the rebuilding of Exchange would ever come to fruition. But it is good to hear CONSTRUCTIVE responses & not be torn apart by others who think they know so much better...

[robt]

Hellfire - didn't expect an all out war..!

Just to clarify; when you buy a train ticket - it is indeed for a seat.

Just to clarify.. the National Rail Conditions of Carriage disagree with you, of which I have attached the revevant section. The section is valid whether seat reservations are available or not.


Getting back to the point tho, it appears that most usrs wish to see a major rebuild of Central. What then would be the feasibility of utilitising some of the space on the old High Level site?

I think the feasibility of using the old high level is not even remotely likely, due to other points made in this thread such as the tunnel not actually going anywhere anymore.

andyk, I'm sure a single platform could be squeezed in at high level, but I have no idea how the line would rejoin the line to take you to the airport. But having said that, I don't know why this would be done as any rebuild/relocation of Central could take this into consideration and have it terminate in the 'new' more modern underground station.

I think people may have taken the words relocation a bit too literally - I'm pretty sure that a relocation would be built next to the existing station ie at the top of Church Street, as the current Wirral platform would remain as there is nothing wrong with it.

[Scouseinmanc]

"Just to clarify..."

Is Sarcasm your middle name, per chance? ;)

[robt]

"Just to clarify..."

Is Sarcasm your middle name, per chance? ;)

:p lol.

It just frustrates me (as it does to most people) when I state a fact and someone tells me it is wrong, or assumes it is my opinion. Or tells me I have low standards because they think it is how I have been socially conditioned.

[Scouseinmanc]

I actually did check it out earlier & was advised the same :)

So I completely understand your frustration in that regard. I'd be exactly the same. In fact, I'd be right on my soap box tbh!

[andyk]

.

I think the feasibility of using the old high level is not even remotely likely, due to other points made in this thread such as the tunnel not actually going anywhere anymore.

andyk, I'm sure a single platform could be squeezed in at high level, but I have no idea how the line would rejoin the line to take you to the airport. But having said that, I don't know why this would be done as any rebuild/relocation of Central could take this into consideration and have it terminate in the 'new' more modern underground station.

..I totally agree ! There is little chance of the High Level site being reused as a station NEVERTHELESS
it is fun to envisage such projects and discuss them.Anyone intelligent will enjoy the debate without the need to put down or ridicule someone who innocently proposes something "unusual" such as the reopening of Exchange !

A last word on the feasability of connecting High Level to the link:
As things stand,the old tunnel goes nowhere,as it was deepened to run into
Central.However,it would not be a huge engineering task to construct a ramp that would maintain the original tunnels depth and reconnect the disused length.The tunnel is certainly wide enough !

Pie in the sky ? Perhaps ! In anycase I'm not a fanatic like Waterways and I'm happy to let my "pet-project" descend into the darkness of the YoLiverpool archives !

[Scouseinmanc]

Hi AndyK

Are you the same guy who posts on the Southport Past forum?

Rgds, SiM

[Waterways]

Gents, calm down. Some good points made all around.

I suggested re-using Exchange because it is still there and can take overspill of out of Merseyside trains from Lime Street. It would need an underground passage to Moorfields station.

Local Metro traffic has to be segregated from North West and beyond.

Forget a station at Central High Level as it to be built on.

Implementing this Circle Line does a hell of a lot for the city. Click here:
Circle Line (http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/watercity/Merseyrail-Extensions.html)

St Helens trains can run around the circle and go to the Wirral if need be. The same with a Wrexham connection too. Central only has through traffic making matters easier - may need extending still though. Local traffic is then kept out of Lime St giving extra space. If Lime St can't cope then Exchange is still there to take out of Merseyside traffic.

That is fine.

Inner-city regenerated by a Circle Line using a comprehensive system using old tunnels.
All local rail traffic is then on the full Merseyrail system, giving great flexibility.
Capacity to overflow from Lime Street.
Maybe Lime St is Maglev and Exchange takes much of the rest.


The scope is there. I think all agree that

That leaves John Lennon airport. The best is a dedicated Merseyrail station, and connections to Manchester, North West Main Line, Manchester airport and others too. Will they do it? Maybe eventually.

A stop-gap can be dual pick up tram-trains, that run on Merseyrail and in its tunnels and on roads from a convenient point from South Parkway to the airport.

In the background is the Wrexham Line that is rumored to be overhead wires to Bidston and third rail into Liverpool. Using the old James St to Central tunnel they can reach Central and go beyond direct to John Lennon, hopefully to a new station there. However they can drop to the roads on the last mile to the airport using tram-trains.

The priorities that promote the city and regenerate quickly are:

Circle Line (this kills many birds with one stone, brings in St Helens and all from St Helens to the centre and is hub and spreads traffic around)
John Lennon airport connections
Wrexham line brought in to the centre with airport connection.
Lime St overflow at Exchange if need is there

[jonnyb1978]

Just to point out about the discussions regarding central to be re built, new platforms etc. This is ot going to happen, although with a unlimited pot of money it would be great for the city

The station has no plans to be moved, closed etc for rebuilding. However later on this year it will be going through an extensive refurbishment mainly on the concourse area with a new ticket office/shop put in where the existing shop is now.

[robt]

Just to point out about the discussions regarding central to be re built, new platforms etc. This is ot going to happen, although with a unlimited pot of money it would be great for the city

The station has no plans to be moved, closed etc for rebuilding. However later on this year it will be going through an extensive refurbishment mainly on the concourse area with a new ticket office/shop put in where the existing shop is now.

Considering that Network Rail have not decided yet (and won't for at least six years yet), it is a tad unlikely that you know. Maybe you should read the 100 odd pages of tthe RUS.

[jonnyb1978]

Considering that Network Rail have not decided yet (and won't for at least six years yet), it is a tad unlikely that you know. Maybe you should read the 100 odd pages of tthe RUS.

Like i said. There are no plans. You quite rightly point out Network Rail have yet to decide, which in my opinion means there are no plans. I did not say there never will be but at this time and for the immediate future there are no plans. The station is having a refurbishment mostly to the concourse area later this year.
So yes i do know that there are no plans AS YET and there is a refurbishment taking place. The reason i know, i work for Network Rail and deal with local projects. Hence we are concentrating on delap works at a number of stations over the next few months also.

[robt]

Like i said. There are no plans. You quite rightly point out Network Rail have yet to decide, which in my opinion means there are no plans. I did not say there never will be but at this time and for the immediate future there are no plans. The station is having a refurbishment mostly to the concourse area later this year.
So yes i do know that there are no plans AS YET and there is a refurbishment taking place. The reason i know, i work for Network Rail and deal with local projects. Hence we are concentrating on delap works at a number of stations over the next few months also.

Hence the first post of this thread containing the words "These long term solutions" and the fact that it is stated that they are only thoughts and not proposals? ;)