YO! Liverpool
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 52

Thread: New Undergroud Station in Church Street?

  1. #1
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default New Underground Station in Church Street?

    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.


    ADVERTISING




    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.
    Last edited by Waterways; 02-02-2009 at 03:14 PM.
    The new Amsterdam at Liverpool?
    Save Liverpool Docks and Waterways - Click

    Deprived of its unique dockland waters Liverpool
    becomes a Venice without canals, just another city, no
    longer of special interest to anyone, least of all the
    tourist. Would we visit a modernised Venice of filled in
    canals to view its modern museum describing
    how it once was?


    Giving Liverpool a full Metro - CLICK
    Rapid-transit rail: Everton, Liverpool & Arena - CLICK

    Save Royal Iris - Sign Petition

  2. #2
    Railway Signal Engineer mikewturner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Mossley Hill
    Posts
    52
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    Hi Waterways

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

    Regards

    Mike

  3. #3
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mikewturner View Post
    Hi Waterways

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

    Regards

    Mike
    quoting. but it is their thoughts not proposals
    The new Amsterdam at Liverpool?
    Save Liverpool Docks and Waterways - Click

    Deprived of its unique dockland waters Liverpool
    becomes a Venice without canals, just another city, no
    longer of special interest to anyone, least of all the
    tourist. Would we visit a modernised Venice of filled in
    canals to view its modern museum describing
    how it once was?


    Giving Liverpool a full Metro - CLICK
    Rapid-transit rail: Everton, Liverpool & Arena - CLICK

    Save Royal Iris - Sign Petition

  4. #4
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    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.
    The new Amsterdam at Liverpool?
    Save Liverpool Docks and Waterways - Click

    Deprived of its unique dockland waters Liverpool
    becomes a Venice without canals, just another city, no
    longer of special interest to anyone, least of all the
    tourist. Would we visit a modernised Venice of filled in
    canals to view its modern museum describing
    how it once was?


    Giving Liverpool a full Metro - CLICK
    Rapid-transit rail: Everton, Liverpool & Arena - CLICK

    Save Royal Iris - Sign Petition

  5. #5
    Senior Member merseywail's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Litherland
    Posts
    172
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    ''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.
    Last edited by merseywail; 02-03-2009 at 10:17 AM.
    These things take time, Rome wasn't built in a day you know.
    Flickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/merseywail/

  6. #6
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by merseywail View Post
    ''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.
    The new Amsterdam at Liverpool?
    Save Liverpool Docks and Waterways - Click

    Deprived of its unique dockland waters Liverpool
    becomes a Venice without canals, just another city, no
    longer of special interest to anyone, least of all the
    tourist. Would we visit a modernised Venice of filled in
    canals to view its modern museum describing
    how it once was?


    Giving Liverpool a full Metro - CLICK
    Rapid-transit rail: Everton, Liverpool & Arena - CLICK

    Save Royal Iris - Sign Petition

  7. #7
    Senior Member merseywail's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Litherland
    Posts
    172
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    ''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
    These things take time, Rome wasn't built in a day you know.
    Flickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/merseywail/

  8. #8
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by merseywail View Post
    ''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.
    The new Amsterdam at Liverpool?
    Save Liverpool Docks and Waterways - Click

    Deprived of its unique dockland waters Liverpool
    becomes a Venice without canals, just another city, no
    longer of special interest to anyone, least of all the
    tourist. Would we visit a modernised Venice of filled in
    canals to view its modern museum describing
    how it once was?


    Giving Liverpool a full Metro - CLICK
    Rapid-transit rail: Everton, Liverpool & Arena - CLICK

    Save Royal Iris - Sign Petition

  9. #9
    Senior Member merseywail's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Litherland
    Posts
    172
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    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.
    Last edited by merseywail; 02-03-2009 at 04:42 PM.
    These things take time, Rome wasn't built in a day you know.
    Flickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/merseywail/

  10. #10
    Member Cyon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    18
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    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?

  11. #11
    Newbie SKie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    14
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    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.

  12. #12
    Living the Dream... Scouseinmanc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    37
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    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.

  13. #13
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Scouseinmanc View Post
    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.
    The new Amsterdam at Liverpool?
    Save Liverpool Docks and Waterways - Click

    Deprived of its unique dockland waters Liverpool
    becomes a Venice without canals, just another city, no
    longer of special interest to anyone, least of all the
    tourist. Would we visit a modernised Venice of filled in
    canals to view its modern museum describing
    how it once was?


    Giving Liverpool a full Metro - CLICK
    Rapid-transit rail: Everton, Liverpool & Arena - CLICK

    Save Royal Iris - Sign Petition

  14. #14
    Living the Dream... Scouseinmanc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    37
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Waterways View Post
    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.

  15. #15
    Senior Member ChrisGeorge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Baltimore, Maryland, USA
    Posts
    3,592
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Scouseinmanc View Post
    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
    Christopher T. George
    Editor, Ripperologist
    Editor, Loch Raven Review
    http://christophertgeorge.blogspot.com/
    Chris on Flickr and on MySpace

  16. #16
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Scouseinmanc View Post
    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.
    The new Amsterdam at Liverpool?
    Save Liverpool Docks and Waterways - Click

    Deprived of its unique dockland waters Liverpool
    becomes a Venice without canals, just another city, no
    longer of special interest to anyone, least of all the
    tourist. Would we visit a modernised Venice of filled in
    canals to view its modern museum describing
    how it once was?


    Giving Liverpool a full Metro - CLICK
    Rapid-transit rail: Everton, Liverpool & Arena - CLICK

    Save Royal Iris - Sign Petition

  17. #17
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisGeorge View Post
    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...
    The new Amsterdam at Liverpool?
    Save Liverpool Docks and Waterways - Click

    Deprived of its unique dockland waters Liverpool
    becomes a Venice without canals, just another city, no
    longer of special interest to anyone, least of all the
    tourist. Would we visit a modernised Venice of filled in
    canals to view its modern museum describing
    how it once was?


    Giving Liverpool a full Metro - CLICK
    Rapid-transit rail: Everton, Liverpool & Arena - CLICK

    Save Royal Iris - Sign Petition

  18. #18
    Senior Member robt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    101
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

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

  19. #19
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by robt View Post
    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.
    The new Amsterdam at Liverpool?
    Save Liverpool Docks and Waterways - Click

    Deprived of its unique dockland waters Liverpool
    becomes a Venice without canals, just another city, no
    longer of special interest to anyone, least of all the
    tourist. Would we visit a modernised Venice of filled in
    canals to view its modern museum describing
    how it once was?


    Giving Liverpool a full Metro - CLICK
    Rapid-transit rail: Everton, Liverpool & Arena - CLICK

    Save Royal Iris - Sign Petition

  20. #20
    Senior Member robt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    101
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Waterways View Post
    The station on the Northern Line at Paradise St was an extra station.
    But this one is not.

  21. #21
    Member jc_everton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    59
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    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.

  22. #22
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jc_everton View Post
    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.
    The new Amsterdam at Liverpool?
    Save Liverpool Docks and Waterways - Click

    Deprived of its unique dockland waters Liverpool
    becomes a Venice without canals, just another city, no
    longer of special interest to anyone, least of all the
    tourist. Would we visit a modernised Venice of filled in
    canals to view its modern museum describing
    how it once was?


    Giving Liverpool a full Metro - CLICK
    Rapid-transit rail: Everton, Liverpool & Arena - CLICK

    Save Royal Iris - Sign Petition

  23. #23
    Member jc_everton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    59
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    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.

  24. #24
    Living the Dream... Scouseinmanc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    37
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    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... "
    Last edited by Scouseinmanc; 02-17-2009 at 12:55 PM.

  25. #25
    Member andyk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Gers / France
    Posts
    23
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    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.

  26. #26
    Member jc_everton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    59
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    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.

  27. #27
    Living the Dream... Scouseinmanc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    37
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Smile

    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.
    Last edited by Scouseinmanc; 02-17-2009 at 02:14 PM.

  28. #28
    Senior Member robt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    101
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jc_everton View Post
    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.

  29. #29
    Senior Member merseywail's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Litherland
    Posts
    172
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    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.
    These things take time, Rome wasn't built in a day you know.
    Flickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/merseywail/

  30. #30
    Senior Member robt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    101
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by merseywail View Post
    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.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. St. Peter's Church, Church Street
    By Emmanuel Goldstein in forum Liverpool City Center Architecture
    Replies: 90
    Last Post: 11-26-2011, 01:43 PM
  2. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-16-2009, 08:47 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

For daily updates, to support us further or to join in the conversation: Follow us on Twitter @YOLiverpool / Like our Facebook Page: @yoliverpoolpics / Join the Facebook Group: YO! Liverpool Pictures

× Thanks for coming to the web site. Support our future by turning off your Ad-Blocker or consider a donation via PayPal or Credit Card!