Page 2 of 28 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 416

Thread: Liverpool Waterloo Tunnel Update 10th Feb 2008

  1. #16
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jc_everton View Post
    Whether there was a station there 100 years ago or not is pretty irrelevant in my eyes.
    From a student's point of view, such as myself, a new 'metro' station at Byrom St (or Fontenoy) would be fantastic.
    I am at Byrom St, along with around 2000 other students and hundreds of staff. The only car parking is for staff, and this is set to close in the future - I think the uni wants to encourage more 'environmentally sustainable' ways of travelling to Byrom St.
    Also near this 'station' are many student flats, the Avril Robarts library, the museum, art gallery, and of course the excellent Ship & Mitre pub!

    Another way of looking at this in a 'student' perspective is that this tunnel effectively ends up at Edge Hill. It is around this area that many students live, and if a new station was constructed around Smithdown, access to Byrom St for students would be easier, quicker, more 'sustainable', and help ease road congestion.

    One more issue as regards this line and universities, is the even better prospect of opening a new station somewhere around the Liverpool University district, serving even more students. I know the line runs underneath The Dental University, which is more or less in the heart of the university area, but I'm not sure where the exits would be. This shouldn't be a problem though, as some underground exits are so small, you wouldn't know they were.
    I have previously posted this....

    If the Shanghai Tower at Princes Half-Tide Dock is approved, Merseyrail has to seriously consider reopening the Waterloo tunnel which emerges adjacent. This tower may have a cascade affect of development from it further inland too and then Byrom St may need a station at Fontenoy cutting in the tunnel.

    Get the underground rail infrastructure in place and the rest will follow. This may need serious public money invested in the Merseyrail system - essential.

    An outer Liverpool city centre underground circle line should be a priority to regenerate the inner city. As outlined in another thread:

    • Take the Garston line at Otterspool under Otterspool Park (cut and cover). Easy to do across parkland.
    • Into Aigburth Vale, and build an underground station here serving that centre.
    • Down Aigburth Rd to Dingle (cut and cover again) and a station at Lark Lane, serving that centre.
    • Up to Dingle from Lark Lane and branch into the Dingle tunnel
    • Re-commission the disused Dingle station serving that centre.
    • Re-commission the Dingle tunnel and install a gantry that takes the tracks to low level and back into the Garston line at the Herculaneum Dock.
    • Abandon the St Micheal's Station and the line from Otterspool to Herculaneum.
    • From the top of Aigburth Rd branch along Ullyet Rd and across Princes Park (cut and Cover), to Lodge Lane/Sefton Pk Rd. Easy to do across parkland.
    • Build a station at Sefton Park Rd serving the park and that centre.
    • Take the tunnel up Lodge Lane (cut and cover)
    • Build a station in Lodge Lane and serve that centre.
    • Up Tunnel Rd to Edge Hill junction.
    • Down the Waterloo Tunnel from Edge Hill
    • Cut out of the tunnel a new station at London Rd serving that centre
    • Cut out of the tunnel a new station at Byrom St serving that centre
    • Out at Waterloo Dock
    • Build a station here serving that centre
    • Branch onto the northern line and back to the city centre.


    This outer city center underground loop serves many centres which would act as a catalyst for regeneration in all of them - re-generate the inner city!!!!! Two existing tunnels, the Waterloo and Dingle, would be re-commissioned alleviating much of the cost with the rest being mainly cut and cover.

    It would be quite cheap for what it would offer and the re-birth of the inner city. What city has such a legacy that is easily adapted to provide such a base in which to re-generate the inner city? Most other cities in the world would drool at what Liverpool has which is already in place.
    Last edited by Waterways; 03-03-2008 at 06:14 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. #17

    Default

    Waterways: a very interesting and detailed post, you should send your ideas off to MerseyRail complete with maps and diagrams. They probably wouldn't take it seriously, but it shows you have more vision than they do.
    Unfortunately, I don't know south Liverpool well, so I got a bit lost halfway through your post!
    The key word you seem to emphasise is 'regeneration', which I will be doing a masters in next year.
    The only problem I've got with your idea then is that although it would massively benefit south Liverpool socio-economically, it would be another case of massive investment in south Liverpool, and something which would not be of benefit to east or north Liverpool - which is where I believe the investment should be being made, and statistically holds some of the most deprived areas in the country.
    As the north Liverpool extension line is alive and active, a bit of investment (not an awful lot would be needed in comparison to your plans) in this line, allowing people in the areas around the line to travel to city centre quickly and effectively, whilst as previously discussed, allowing thousands of Everton and Liverpool supporters to travel to a whole host of destinations. And if the North Mersey Branch Line reopened, it would also link in Aintree/Maghull etc.

    Perhaps the north Liverpool extension line will reopen at some stage in the future - the reopening of the Olive Mount Chord is a step in the right direction, as so many areas of north Liverpool would be connected to Manchester without having to travel to Central, then Lime St. The chord would also allow for football supporters to travel east.

    Technically, you could have trains running from near Walton Lane (the football stop) directly to Lime St (connecting the Wirral), Southport, Ormskirk, Liverpool Parkway (via Edgehill?) Hunts Cross, Warrington, St Helens, Manchester.

    Maybe not all of these destinations would have direct services, but the scope is there, and lets not forget, Everton and Liverpool fans travel from all over the place.

  3. #18
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jc_everton View Post
    Waterways: a very interesting and detailed post, you should send your ideas off to MerseyRail complete with maps and diagrams. They probably wouldn't take it seriously, but it shows you have more vision than they do.
    Unfortunately, I don't know south Liverpool well, so I got a bit lost halfway through your post!
    Follow a map as you are reading.

    The key word you seem to emphasise is 'regeneration', which I will be doing a masters in next year.
    Put the infrastructure there and they will flock in.

    The only problem I've got with your idea then is that although it would massively benefit south Liverpool socio-economically, it would be another case of massive investment in south Liverpool, and something which would not be of benefit to east or north Liverpool - which is where I believe the investment should be being made, and statistically holds some of the most deprived areas in the country.
    Not so. The loop goes around the centre, south, east and north. Station cut into the Waterloo tunnel serving he north side of the centre. Edge Hill, and connections, serving the east. The loop would be from Waterloo going south: Waterloo into Moorfields/Central stn. On to Parliament st (old underground station already there), Brunswick, Dingle, Sefton Park Rd, Lodge Lane, Edge Hill, Down the waterloo Tunnel, Station cut in at London Rd, Hodgson ST, back to Waterloo. Lark Lane and Aigburth would be off the loop



    Peel is investing a lot in Liverpool Waters in the north end, Far more than what the south end will ever get. That will be a catalyst that will spread out.

    As the north Liverpool extension line is alive and active, a bit of investment (not an awful lot would be needed in comparison to your plans) in this line, allowing people in the areas around the line to travel to city centre quickly and effectively, whilst as previously discussed, allowing thousands of Everton and Liverpool supporters to travel to a whole host of destinations. And if the North Mersey Branch Line reopened, it would also link in Aintree/Maghull etc.
    That is largely intact and needs updating. The loop just needs some mainly cut and cover and the odd tunnel boring leavings stations behind. London Rd is the only station, and maybe the Royal Hosp that needs cutting out.

    Perhaps the north Liverpool extension line will reopen at some stage in the future - the reopening of the Olive Mount Chord is a step in the right direction, as so many areas of north Liverpool would be connected to Manchester without having to travel to Central, then Lime St. The chord would also allow for football supporters to travel east.
    Worth doing. However an inner city underground loop will befit the city as whole.

    Technically, you could have trains running from near Walton Lane (the football stop) directly to Lime St (connecting the Wirral), Southport, Ormskirk, Liverpool Parkway (via Edgehill?) Hunts Cross, Warrington, St Helens, Manchester.

    Maybe not all of these destinations would have direct services, but the scope is there, and lets not forget, Everton and Liverpool fans travel from all over the place.
    Getting them in and out fast is a priority indeed, however the regeneration of the inner city is paramount. Once done, it will spread out.Get the centre and immediate inner city around the centre sorted and the rest will fall into line.
    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. #19

    Default

    Ok, but I'm still very confused as to the whereabouts of some these tunnels - there is only so much information on a map - no underground information.

    I am aware there is some sort of tunnel in Dingle, but I can't find this on old maps. Is it still intact, and does connect with the Northern Line. I really think that we should start producing maps and diagrams to explain ourselves a little better!

    You say about Waterloo connecting with the Northern Line, but doesn't this tunnel run below the Northern Line? Therefore, new tunnels would have to be constructed - heavy investment needed. And as for the loop running down south Liverpool near Sefton Park, are you implying that whole new tunnels need to be constructed too?

    I personally believe that the Waterloo Line should be connected to the Northern Line and also to Lime St - but again, a new tunnel would be needed, yes? I really think a definitive tunnels map needs to be made - well the council probably have one, but getting hold of it is another matter.

    Come to think of it, your loop idea is smart, but my concern lies with Meseyside as a whole, and if commuters from all over Merseyside can travel to near London Rd, Waterloo, Wapping and other areas you mention, then that can only be of benefit to the city.

    But I do believe the area around the North Liverpool Extension Line is in the most need of regenerating, and this line, at least for now, has the potential to link up to Lime St.

    As I say though Mr. Waterways, maps and diagrams would be fantastic - indeed, you should write a dissertation like myself!

  5. #20
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    Below: 1913 map:



    above a 1913 map

    • The proposed 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.
    • The new stations are marked


    The existing used line from Otterspool station to the end of the Dingle tunnel (blue and pink tunnel) can be taken up and free up this area for development.

    The cut and cover of Aigburth Rd can be put back and only the loop formed making the project cheaper. However Aigburth Vale and a new station for Lark Lane would not be built.

    Dingle underground station 1906 (toxteth.net)


    Dingle underground station still exists:




    Below: the Dingle Tunnel. Tunnel to Dingle station. The south end of the old Overhead Railway. It started underground.


    A BIG Outer Loop:

    Depending on if a Mersey barrage is built. If so a bridge over the Mersey From Speke/Garston to the Wirral.

    Recommission the outer loop from Edge Hill through Walton to the North End Docks. Over the barrage into New Brighton. Down the Wirral on existing Merseyrail and onto the Bridge. Across the Mersey and meet up at South Parkway. Could recommission the Gatacre Line track through Childwall.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	big_toxteth_mapbw_5x4.gif 
Views:	1307 
Size:	121.0 KB 
ID:	7792   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	tunnel%201.jpg 
Views:	1599 
Size:	33.1 KB 
ID:	7793  
    Last edited by Waterways; 08-18-2008 at 09:00 AM.
    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

  6. #21
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jc_everton View Post
    As I say though Mr. Waterways, maps and diagrams would be fantastic - indeed, you should write a dissertation like myself!
    I already have a degree - one is enough. If I write one will they give me another degree?
    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. #22
    Railway Signal Engineer mikewturner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Mossley Hill
    Posts
    52

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jc_everton View Post
    Whether there was a station there 100 years ago or not is pretty irrelevant in my eyes..... snipped
    From a transport plan for the future point of view it makes no odds but from an accurate historical record it is very important.

    So far only one person has stated that a station existed here and has not presented any facts to back this up. I am sorry but memories are not good enough. What is required is evidence from primary sources eg plans, maps, minute books, photographs etc. So far these all point to no station at this site.

    Further to my previous posting re the actual reason for the wide cutting at Hodson Street here is the gradient diagram for the line taken from a BR signalling plan.



    And here is an extract from the same plan showing the catch points intended to derail trains running away on the steep gradients.



    Edge Hill (Waterloo Tunnel Mouth) is to the left and Waterloo Goods to the right. The signal is Waterloo Goods Distant shown at 975 yards from the signal box and the concentric circles on posts numbered 32 and 36 are gongs (bells) worked from the signal box to give instructions to shunting trains. The run-off from the bottom line is shown with a sand drag and because it's between the running lines they must be set at a wider interval and therefore the cutting is wider.

    Regards

    Mike Turner

  8. #23

    Default

    Mike, where did you get them plans from? Fantastic stuff.

    From an objective point of view, the consensus seems to be that there was no passenger station (or any station of note) at Byrom St, so I think it should be a matter of case closed.

    The great thing about the cutting though, and the small piece of land next to it (corner of Byrom St and Great Crosshall St), is that it doesn't require an awful lot of imagination to picture a metro-style stop there. Unlike other ear-marked underground stations in Liverpool, this cutting is almost ready made for one. How I would love to have travelled to the JMU building on the train and stopped off at the Byrom St cutting everday! Maybe one day...

    Change of subject here... Andrew Makinson, councillor of Smithdown and a member of the MPTE tells me that new stations cost in the region of £12m.

    Does anyone else agree that unmanned stations (such as Burscough Junction) or halts would be a much better and cheaper alternative? Stations such as Central and Moorfields have electronic barriers, and the Wigan/Preston trains have ticket inspectors on at all times where you can buy your ticket. Surely a much better idea than paying millions for new station offices etc? Especially at inner city sites such as Tuebrook, where land is limited around the old station. A platform would surely suffice? And a wooden shelter. Naturally.

  9. #24
    Creator & Administrator Kev's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Under The Stairs >> Under The Mud.
    Posts
    7,488
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default

    Congrats on a great thread, I've just caught up on it. Loved reading the discussions about the new lines
    Become A Supporter 👇


    Donate Via PayPal


    Donate


  10. #25
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mikewturner View Post
    The tunnel looks like it is below sea level at one point. Is that so? Is so, why?
    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

  11. #26
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    The Parliament St station is there virtually intact - well over time platforms have gone and some offices are still there. £12M is probably to cut out a new station in a tunnel like at Conway Park in Birkenhead.

    The city centre rail loop I highlighted would be cheap for what it gives, as most of the tunnels are there and even two disused stations too, at Parliament St and Dingle. It is some cut and cover tunnels and some boring at joining points. As far as I know, Merseyrail have never come up with the loop idea - only me. Cheap for what it offers in re-generation.

    Stations would need to be manned in Liverpool for security reasons. One the population gathers around the stations because of re-generation they will more than pay for themselves.

    The build cost can be clawed back by a property value tax on homes sold around the stations where the stations being there have upped the value - the loop adds value.
    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

  12. #27

    Default

    Makinson simply said that a new station (such as one in Tuebrook or Anfield) would cost a minimum of £12m, he did not mention the underground. But you'd like to think all the fares they receive, as well as fines, should go some way in terms of the financing! I pay £4.50 return to Liverpool from where I live. Ridiculous.

    The loop line you propose does make an awful lot of sense, but I'm finding the issue of 'cut and cover' quite vague - as if it's as simple as digging a hole in the ground and covering it like a roof on a house. Perhaps I should look into this more over the internet, but also, judging by some of the photos of the Dingle Tunnel, there looks like many logistical and physical problems to overcome. And linking all the tunnels together would require new tunnel building, as the Waterloo and Wapping tunnels run underneath the Northern Line, yes? I am confused as to the depths of all these tunnels.

    The issue of unmanned stations.... I do not believe this would be a problem if there were major changes in the law and justice systems in this country. For example, massive increases in prison sentencing... armed police... but thats off-topic.

    Going back to your loop line... my proposals for the future of the rail network actually involve more direct train services - I believe that trains running from major stations such as Maghull and Ormskirk (Ok, these aren't on the loop line but bear with me) should cut out minor stations such as Walton and Aughton Park (or even all of them) at peak times in order to get the commuters into Liverpool as quickly as possible, allowing the direct trains to get back to Ormskirk quickly to take in the next load. A mixture of indirect and direct services is what I'd like to see, and new stations, like some of the ones you propose on the loop line would actually only slow the journey times down.

    I'm not sure if some European underground trains feel faster than Merseyrail's or whether are actually faster. They certainly feel faster, they seem to have much quicker acceleration. More stops would be useful if we had quicker trains, but Merseyrail's trains are slow accelerators.

    If the trains do not increase in speed over the next 20 years, then Merseyrail should invest in more carriages, for more frequent journeys and longer trains (6-cars). I find it an insult paying £4.50 for a return when I can't even get a seat on the way home from Moorfields. They only run around two 6-car services at peak time. E.g, the 16.45 arrives 15 minutes before the big commuter rush, but still, the station is packed to the rafters and what pulls up? A 3-car train, bursting to the seams.

  13. #28
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jc_everton View Post
    Makinson simply said that a new station (such as one in Tuebrook or Anfield) would cost a minimum of £12m, he did not mention the underground. But you'd like to think all the fares they receive, as well as fines, should go some way in terms of the financing! I pay £4.50 return to Liverpool from where I live. Ridiculous.
    A property value tax on property when sold, that had had its value increase because of the stations is the way to finance. If it had been implemented on the Jubilee Line extension it would have paid for it 4 times over. If someone gains because of a public initiative then they should pay some back.

    The loop line you propose does make an awful lot of sense, but I'm finding the issue of 'cut and cover' quite vague - as if it's as simple as digging a hole in the ground and covering it like a roof on a house.
    Yep. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunnel Paris just cut and cover the boulevards - easy. Aigburth Rd is a boulevard. Cut and cover can go across parkland in Liverpool. Cut a ditch and insert concrete pre-cast curved tunnel walls, then cover.

    Dingle Tunnel, there looks like many logistical and physical problems to overcome.
    The Dingle Tunnel was originally proposed to be extended but never was. The station is there. Just a gantry at the Herculaneum Dock from the tunnel mouth to the existing line beneath all is needed.

    And linking all the tunnels together would require new tunnel building, as the Waterloo and Wapping tunnels run underneath the Northern Line, yes? I am confused as to the depths of all these tunnels.
    The Waterloo goes under the Northern Line. Some tunnels to interconnect tunnels, yes. Not a great amount as most of the system is in place.

    Going back to your loop line... my proposals for the future of the rail network actually involve more direct train services - I believe that trains running from major stations such as Maghull and Ormskirk (Ok, these aren't on the loop line but bear with me) should cut out minor stations such as Walton and Aughton Park (or even all of them) at peak times in order to get the commuters into Liverpool as quickly as possible, allowing the direct trains to get back to Ormskirk quickly to take in the next load. A mixture of indirect and direct services is what I'd like to see, and new stations, like some of the ones you propose on the loop line would actually only slow the journey times down.
    You are proposing a Paris Metro and the to suburbs rapid double-decker RER system. The Liverpool loop is to re-generate the city centre and inner city. It will be like the Circle Line in London. An existing city Centre loop an Outer City Centre Loop (my idea), and lines intersecting these loops that make good connections.

    I consider this loop vital to re-generate the city. It will attract investment around the stations.

    The Dock Rd has to be abandoned as an urban motorway and cars discouraged forcing people onto the trains. The city must revert back to its human scale and be designed for people again.

    BTW, no police with guns.
    Last edited by Waterways; 02-18-2008 at 02:25 AM.
    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. #29
    Senior Member Sirob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    235

    Default Waterloo Tunnel

    View these blasts from the past(1971)
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Untitled-Scanned-31.jpg 
Views:	395 
Size:	540.9 KB 
ID:	5287   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Untitled-Scanned-36.jpg 
Views:	517 
Size:	532.4 KB 
ID:	5288  

  15. #30
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sirob View Post
    View these blasts from the past(1971)
    Fabulous!!! Was that the last train through the Waterloo Tunnel?
    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

Page 2 of 28 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Victoria/Waterloo Tunnel,Liverpool.July 2010.
    By wherever i may roam in forum Liverpool's Road and Rail Development
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 12-06-2010, 06:47 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
  •