Quote Originally Posted by Waterways View Post
I still think you don't get it. Since when has an underground system been a silly idea? A city centre underground rail loop is created with underground stations in major districts, which will regenerate them.

Fast, comfortable and frequent transportation infrastructure is the key - underground trains - the city has disused underground tunnels that need re-using and needs more. Underground systems serve all the major cities of the world well. They penetrate right into the centre of districts.

I read once of a suggestion I liked to divert the Garston line as it passes through Otterspool, through the park under ground and down Aigburth Rd under the road. At the top of Aigburth Rd a branch into the Dingle underground stn, along the Dingle tunnel and out over the Herculaneum Dock onto the line again. The other branch at the top of Aigburth Rd would go along Ullyet Rd, Sefton Pk Rd, Lodge Lane, Tunnel Rd and into Edge Hill. Most of it would be cheap cut and cover along the roads, with little boring of tunnels.

Underground stations would be at: Aigburth Vale, Lark Lane, Sefton Pk Rd, the existing station at Dingle, Lodge Lane and Tunnel Rd (maybe). St Michaels Stn would be done away with - it is out on limb anyway. It would serve 4 major districts, right into the heart of them and no rail lines to be seen. It would also form a part of a city centre loop, which I explained previously using the Waterloo tunnel from Edge Hill to Waterloo Dock.
I understand the point you are making but you don't understand the difference between London and Liverpool. No one seems to know the exact figures but about 500,000 people live in Liverpool.London has so many boroughs and commuters that a train/tube system is needed. It wouldn't be Economically Sustainable in Liverpool. That is my point