Liverpool Waterloo Tunnel Update 10th Feb 2008

[Waterways]

One thing we are all forgetting here, the Dingle Station is owned by a private company (Roscoe's) who have an extensive set up already there and doubt would ever move out unless they were given a pretty penny. Where else would you find a motor garage with all that space??

You may as well write anything off to do with the Dingle Station.

I don't know if they own or lease the station. A CPO will bring it back into use. The public need comes before a garage.

[Waterways]

Do you mean UNDER Sefton Park?... are actually looking at a map?...the loop on no.20 is TINY...You clearly have no uderstanding of how planning works...you do not seem to understand the tram routes now proposed and or the capacities of the different modes.

It is clear you lack the intelligence to grasp the points I put across so clearly.

The Loop is NOT tiny at all, it goes around the city centre, suing the Waterloo and Dingle tunnels running through inner city areas that require regeneration. If you had read and understood the posts you would have grasped this long ago. About 80% of its tunnels are in place now. From Dingle to Edge Hill can take the tunnel across parts Princes Park, which is easy to do by cut and cover. Do you understand that? I ask as you keep coming back with the same misunderstandings.

There is no need to carry on uninformed 'guessing' of what routes might or might not work

That I have not done, only stating the capability of flexible routing is a great bonus and pretty essential in an expanding city.

There has been enough formal work done and the way forward is clear, ie. the reinstatement of as much of the 'old' system as is needed and that includes trams.

There is NO firm plan ahead. Everything is off the cuff. The implementing of trams (the lines were delivered) was asinine, when essential disused rail infrastructure was laying there waiting to be used, which would bring far more benefits to an expanding and growing city. Trams figure - but only back burner. They foolishly brought to the front burner.

It's Liverpool's great advantage ( or 'USP') over other UK cities because it can be done the cheapest. If you want to know what it looks like, there have been plans of the old system on this forum before.

Yes. our legacy is a great advantage - and it is not being utilised. Putting in trams schemes is not using existing infrastructure.

I suggest that Waterways draws his system on top of a city map so that he and we can understand what his proposals

Post No. 20 is on a city map.

Of more interest are new ideas, based on the existing or unused system, that will improve service and make the sytem more competitive - anyone?

That is exactly what I proposed. Look at the posts. It is what it does to serve the people and project the city that matters - never lose sight of that.

[Waterways]

Here it is again...

Circle Line - click here


above a 1913 map showing the rail lines very well - the reason it is used.

• The proposed Circle Line loop line is in blue.
• The blue and pink are existing disused tunnels
• The blue and green is predominantly cut and cover not tunnelling.
• The blue only is existing used line.
• Tunneling where cut and cover meets existing tunnels.
• The red is the existing unused Wapping tunnel, which is not on the Circle Line. This can be used to link the Wirral with Edge Hill and beyond if need be.
• The new stations are marked

Below: the Dingle Tunnel. Tunnel to Dingle station. The south end of the old Overhead Railway. It started underground. The Northern Line runs just off shot to the left.


Below, the proposed Circle Line, in Red. Stations at top running clockwise:

• Waterloo Dock
• Byrom St
• London Rd
• Edge Hill
• Lodge Lane
• Sefton Pk Rd
• Dingle
• Brunswick
• St James
• Central
• Lime St
• Moorefields

The black line is the new line in from St Helens.

It is easy to see the great enhancement it makes to the city's underground. And 80% of the Circle Line is already in place. The line would be better presented if totally re-drawn.

[jc_everton]

You keep suggesting that 'all the infrastructure is in place'. Well, are all the original tracks still there waiting to be used, like the NMB or Bootle Branch? I think not.
Either way, whether trams or metro is implemented, tracks will have to be laid.

Tram tracks will have to be laid on the streets or even in the tunnels and train tracks will have to be laid in the old run-down tunnels as well as the boring of a new tunnel.

As most trams use roads, whether they be pedestrianised roads or shared, doesn't that mean 100% of tram infrastructure is in place as opposed to your 80%? You may argue that laying down tram tracks on roads is going to cause wide-spread disruption. My answer is, so what? If it frustrates the car user, that can only be a good thing. After all, the aim is to reduce the need to travel by car.

As I say, if the tracks were lying there waiting to be used, your case would be perfectly justifiable.
But just because there are tunnels, it doesn't mean to say we can have a system up-and-running immediately and with minimum fuss.

And as for my 'suspension railway' picture, I knew it would be greeted with conservative contempt. The reason why I put that on was to show the sheer uniquity and individuality that the system has. The bridge may have been slightly obtrusive and dominant but this city really should be striving for a world-class, unique transport system that we can all be proud of. If it means copying the Bordeaux model, then great. Ok, it won't be unique but it certainly would be in the UK.
What's wrong with a bit of vision/ambition anyway?

[petromax]

It is clear you lack the intelligence to grasp the points I put across so clearly.

The Loop is NOT tiny at all, it goes around the city centre, suing the Waterloo and Dingle tunnels running through inner city areas that require regeneration. If you had read and understood the posts you would have grasped this long ago. About 80% of its tunnels are in place now. From Dingle to Edge Hill can take the tunnel across parts Princes Park, which is easy to do by cut and cover. Do you understand that? I ask as you keep coming back with the same misunderstandings.



That I have not done, only stating the capability of flexible routing is a great bonus and pretty essential in an expanding city.



There is NO firm plan ahead. Everything is off the cuff. The implementing of trams (the lines were delivered) was asinine, when essential disused rail infrastructure was laying there waiting to be used, which would bring far more benefits to an expanding and growing city. Trams figure - but only back burner. They foolishly brought to the front burner.



Yes. our legacy is a great advantage - and it is not being utilised. Putting in trams schemes is not using existing infrastructure.



Post No. 20 is on a city map.



That is exactly what I proposed. Look at the posts. It is what it does to serve the people and project the city that matters - never lose sight of that.

I have understood you perfectly well. Perhaps when you grow up, you will understand that you should give credit for people being somewhat brighter than you at first imagine - particularly when you don't know who you are talking to or indeed in this case, what you are talking about.

I am afraid I won't bother to reply to you again as I have better things to do, thank you

[Cadfael]

I don't know if they own or lease the station. A CPO will bring it back into use. The public need comes before a garage.

Sorry, I forgot that someone's business and livelyhood comes 2nd

[Waterways]

You keep suggesting that 'all the infrastructure is in place'. Well, are all the original tracks still there waiting to be used, like the NMB or Bootle Branch? I think not.

Use a little common sense now. Around in circles again. Here I go again....The most expensive part is the tunneling and that is mainly in place - well 80% of it is. Parts of it are used - the Northern line.

I am not going into needless trams when an underground is waiting to be re-used - you and Martin have a thing about these vibrating lumps. Martin may make his living out of such things.

I fear your disitation will not be up to scratch. You fail to understand what rail systems can bring to an expanding re-populating city with inner city areas begging for regeneration. You appear to be wanting to implement technology for the sake of it - that always fails.

• What are you trying solve?
• What are you trying to generate in the future?
• What benefits will the people gain?
• Will it assist in future city growth?
• Will it benefit existing city districts?
• What are the stages of implementation?
• What are the priorities of implementation?

You must never lose sight of the above - you clearly are by your ramblings here. Of course it has to be done as economically as possible. Using existing infrastructure, will this give the solution and the economy? You will find it does. Then it is a matter of merging the old existing infrastructures with existing Merseyrail Network - and that is not expensive either for what the final result gives. Then when the economical part is complete (using existing infrastructure) then outline the enhancements to fill in where Merseyrail cannot.

And as for my 'suspension railway' picture, I knew it would be greeted with conservative contempt.

That is hideous and we should never build such scrap. I would rather re-build the Piggeries than build that.

[Ged]

Kev posted this up in May last year, just in case any of the newer posters haven't seen it. Don't know if it's moved on any but it gives you some idea of the work required and what rolling stock they'd use in them and what the plans were/are to link them to:


Disused Waterloo and Wapping Railway Tunnels 'may be reopened'

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TWO disused rail tunnels opened more than 150 years ago could be brought out of retirement to ease Liverpool’s transport headache.

A report compiled by Merseytravel’s chief executive Neil Scales is calling for studies into reopening the Waterloo and Wapping tunnels out of Edge Hill, built in the early days of steam to cater for dock-bound traffic.

Both tunnels were closed in the early 1970s, but may now have a new lease of life as part of a 21st-century transport infrastructure.

Last night, Liverpool Chamber of Commerce transport spokesman Stephen Pearse welcomed the move and called for imaginative ideas to make full use of the redundant underground routes.

He said one scheme could be a futuristic monorail to link Edge Hill Station with the new arena and convention centre at Kings Dock and the Grosvenor development.

Merseytravel’s rails services committee is to study a report detailing the reopening of the tunnels at a meeting early next month.

Reopening them could open up new links to Manchester and St Helens from Southport.

Wapping Tunnel opened in 1829 to directly link the main Liverpool to Manchester line to the south docks.

The Waterloo tunnel opened 20 years later to link the main line to the north docks, close to the site now occupied by the giant Costco wholesale warehouse.

The report describes the state of both tunnels, which both start at Edge Hill station, as being in some disrepair. But it adds that, with extensive repair work, they could feasibly be reopened for railway use.

Merseytravel is talking to the city council about protecting the sites to enable the tunnel heads to have space to link to the existing City Line. Wapping would be easier to return to use because preparation work was carried out in 1974 when the original Merseyrail system was built.

Last night, Mr Scales said: “The reopening of the tunnels would provide for a number of potential additional, or modified rail services.

“Both tunnels link into the City Line network in the Edge Hill area.”

Mr Scales said it was envisaged the tunnels would both use electric trains to enable them to integrate into the electrified Northern Line services.

He added: “The Waterloo tunnel may be particularly important in terms of the developing economy.

“Merseytravel is in discussions with the Liverpool Land Development Company regarding the potential development of the north shore area which the Waterloo Tunnel could provide a direct link to for current City Line services.” The cost of reopening the tunnels has not yet been assessed, but it is likely to be a multi-million pound project.

Mr Pearse added: “We welcome discussions about improved transport links in and around Liverpool. There are many imaginative solutions that could be proposed, using the tunnels. If train services are not feasible, they could be used for transport modes such as a monorail. It would be a good solution for people heading to the arena and the Liverpool One development, as well as the waterfront.”

A spokesman for Merseytravel said last night: “With the consequent rise in popularity of rail services nationwide, and the ever- increasing congestion on roads, there will be continuing pressure to provide public transport options which allow a shift from private car to the railway.

“The reopening of either the Waterloo or Wapping tunnels for passenger services could well provide a solution to potential transport problems in the future.”

FOR more news from the Liverpool Daily Post - click here

[Waterways]

Sorry, I forgot that someone's business and livelyhood comes 2nd

You are typical Liverpudlian. They always think of half-baked reasons why there should not be progress - the glass is always half empty.

A CPO compensates them . The greater good of the community at large is paramount.

[robt]

Who is the 'Martin' you have now referred to twice?

[Waterways]

I have understood you perfectly well. Perhaps when you grow up, you will understand that you should give credit for people being somewhat brighter than you at first imagine - particularly when you don't know who you are talking to or indeed in this case, what you are talking about.

I am afraid I won't bother to reply to you again as I have better things to do, thank you

You clearly did not understand what was put forward at all. Your analytical skills are poor. You whittered on about trams like a demented train spotter, losing sight of what matters, then started to insult clearly indicating you lost it - if you ever had it in the first place.

[Waterways]

Who is the 'Martin' you have now referred to twice?

Mmmmm

[Waterways]

Kev posted this up in May last year, just in case any of the newer posters haven't seen it. Don't know if it's moved on any but it gives you some idea of the work required and what rolling stock they'd use in them and what the plans were/are to link them to:

Disused Waterloo and Wapping Railway Tunnels 'may be reopened'

Thanks Ged, I am aware of that. I may get in touch with the Chamber of Commerce. Getting Merseytravel to implement an idea they never thought of would be near impossible. These organisations are supposed to have vision and creativity - and someone from outside having a better idea then them? They will not have that. They were the ones castigated for going through with the trams and not doing basic common research - like running a tram line to Kirkby paralleling the Merseyrail Line and fast bus routes. Madness!!!! And that would cost millions for no reason whatsoever, when the money can be used to get the existing underground up and running and a rail link to John Lennon airport. Projects that will benefit the city now and project it forwards.

I don't have any faith in Merseytravel to deliver whet the city needs in rail infrastructure after the tram debacle.

[jc_everton]

Would anyone know how to obtain a copy of this report? Merseytravel are such a pain the backside to get in touch with.

Dr. WW PhD, thanks for the kind advice but it is my aim to come up with a number of proposals that are realistic and to also consider the aims of Merseytravel. It seems as if they are considering reopening the tunnels but not in the way you propose. If your proposal was so blatently great, I'm sure someone at Merseytravel would have put the case forward by now and if your scheme does ever go ahead then hat's off to you as your proposals would have been mirrorred by rail experts.
You feel my work will not be up to scratch because I do not agree with you! Is that how dissertations work?!
It is my duty to weigh up every argument and look at the pro's and con's. I see pro's in your loop but I also see con's. I have put forward a number of innovative ideas in order to make us look at the bigger picture and consider all available options. I could have proposed other innovations but it's pointless because they are, of course... pet fads.
I was going to suggest you apply for a lecturer's job at JMU but lecturers need to be open-minded and instil this into their students. Sadly, you fail in this field.

[Cadfael]

You are typical Liverpudlian. They always think of half-baked reasons why there should not be progress - the glass is always half empty.

A CPO compensates them . The greater good of the community at large is paramount.

A typical Liverpudlian? So everyone on the forum is from Liverpool?

CPO? Try and give them a bit of cash so they are forced out of their place of business? If the City Council wanted to put a price on buying out the place, they don't only own the garage but the Tunnel too, give that in square foot and then compensate them with today's prices.