Originally Posted by
pablo42
Couldn't agree more, funny that there seems to be a lot of opposition on here though. Wonder why. Seems common noggin to me.
That mystifies me too. I have travelled to many big cities and they all have a metro work properly. Without one they die. They sensibly use these rapid-transit networks as a means of publicising the cities. Liverpool has one and ignores it.
These advanced cities use their rapid-transit networks to shift fans quickly to and from stadia, so avoid traffic jams and inconvenience on all side, especially residents. London will not allow new stadia unless rapid-transit is adjacent shift half the capacity in one hour: Wembley, The Emirates. Liverpool has one and ignores it when the two clubs at the same time are moving home and building large stadia - a once in a 150 years event. Madness took over the city, no one seemed to know the city has a rapid-transit network to use.
Manchester wanted an underground, but it was too expensive so chose trams - Hobson's Choice. Liverpool has a metro which can be highly comprehensive and done so cheaply, but it is ignored for....trams. Yes, trams. Madness again overtook the city.
The politicos and press put forward that this wonderful outdated old-hat technology was to be the cities saviour. Yes, that is what the said. So they all believed it of course.
They the government rightly said it was silly and you do not know what you are doing and cancelled it. To save face they said it was still the saviour of the city.
div>
So, by the time they realise the city has a metro and it can be easily expanded to serve the people in the best and ultimate manner, they would have lost 10 years.
If the city had gone the route of extending Merseyrail 10 years ago instead of going into the low-tech technology trams, Merseyrail would have been serving and promoting the city right now. The city would have been much further down the regeneration track.
Only in Liverpool.
Bookmarks