Why doesn't he just move to the precint. He'll only have to pay about a fiver a year and there's loads of scruffs in their who'll wear sad leather jackets.

These people are only hanging on to get a good few bob. There not bothered about the city or anything else. We would all probably do the same if we were in their shoes. However i'm sure there's plenty of other retail spaces suitable for the bookshop. As for the leather shop. What a load of tacky shit. Get rid of it.

Why doesn't he just move to the precint. He'll only have to pay about a fiver a year and there's loads of scruffs in their who'll wear sad leather jackets.

These people are only hanging on to get a good few bob. There not bothered about the city or anything else. We would all probably do the same if we were in their shoes. However i'm sure there's plenty of other retail spaces suitable for the bookshop. As for the leather shop. What a load of tacky shit. Get rid of it.




completely agree, they are blatantly just trying to hold out and be as awkward as possible until they get the biggest pay out going. And it does not surprise me, this is a great opportunity for them to get early retirement, they must be rollin there hands in anticapation! "Think of the payout" :) they must be thinking.


" Michael McCabe, owner of the Henry Bohn bookstore, said: “We are looking at this very critical site in the city centre being transformed into a building site in our 800th birthday year.

“What a welcome for visitors to Liverpool.” "


"Oh but think of the tourists", yes thats the reason your being a git Mr McCabe, poor people looking at a building site! Well it would be a damn sight better than looking at your tatty old shops mate, they look a disgrace.


My rant is over, thank you. :)







www.squible.co.uk

" Michael McCabe, owner of the Henry Bohn bookstore, said: “We are looking at this very critical site in the city centre being transformed into a building site in our 800th birthday year.


Interesting quote, considering that he and his leather-selling neighbour are the reasons why work didn’t start ages ago.

i noticed while shopping in the city tonight a huge banner on the concourse tower outside lime street station advertising www.iliadtower.com, i have tried the link and it does not work, or at least there is nothing there yet. I will be keeping a check on it as i am sure you will too. Hopefully it will provide some new images and information on the project when it goes live!

The lastt ime i saw it it was advertising NTL or something, notice the huge spot lights on top, i bet concourse house looks decent at night

its been there for more than a month now...

its been there for more than a month now...


I only noticed that for the first time myself yesterday,one things for certain that tower is going to look amazing when it's built.Did anyone notice the viewing platform at the top of the tower? Is that going to be open to the public? I'd love to think it was the views would be brilliant from there.

They've now put up two banners (the was one up for quite a while on the side facing the city), and I've got to say it's a great use for a derelict building, makes the city look a lot more 'alive'..

Iliad (Lime Street) Tower yesterday

http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m30/chansau/DSC01631.jpg

and another

http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m30/chansau/DSC01626.jpg

Thanks for the pictures chansau, you must have been out around the same time as me yesterday! And welcome to the site too!

Conhouse House looking better than ever...

http://img380.imageshack.us/img380/4250/lime06111in7.jpg

Roadworks dominating Lime Street at the moment.

http://img398.imageshack.us/img398/6505/lime06112df5.jpg

Surely this part of Lime Street must be improved later on.

http://img380.imageshack.us/img380/5228/lime06113os5.jpg

I hope that viewing platform is open to the public.

Great shots Chansau and welcome.

Would look even better if they added an advert to the other side, looks like an impressive advertising board. :cheers:
http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m30/chansau/DSC01626.jpg

Dear Liverpool, Birmingham Calling...

I am a bit of a fan of cylindrical towers and wanted to gauge your opinion on Lime St tower...

Who is the architect? Developer is Network Rail I presume?

What do forumers think of it?

There are pages and pages of this thread so didn't fancy trawling through it - any thoughts are welcome! :)

I love it, and i think many other people do also. It is proposed to have a public viewing space at the top of the tower. I think the shape of this tower is more of an oval than a circular tower.

There is a website now which does work, but not much info yet. click on the link here.
www.iliadtower.com


Click on this link for a more detailed description
liverpoolvision (http://www.liverpoolvision.co.uk/actionareas/limestgateway.asp)

Hi Biosonic, couldn't find the original thread for you (why doesn't the search function work!?) but thanks for your enquiry, I'm a fan of cylindrical towers as well so I'm very excited about this one. I think the majority of people here, and in the city are looking forward to this. It looks like a high quality development, and even though it's only a humble 28 storeys (plus additional level) the sites natural elevation will give it a very prominent position on the Liverpool skyline.

Can't wait to see it built, anything interesting on the Birmingham horizon cylindrically?

apart from the Rotunda:)

He said interesting, yeh meff... :D

lmao

great pics guys, its good to hear things moving on this project, its going to make such a difffernce to the area! can't wait until they start on it...




www.squible.co.uk

I love it, and i think many other people do also. It is proposed to have a public viewing space at the top of the tower. I think the shape of this tower is more of an oval than a circular tower.

There is a website now which does work, but not much info yet. click on the link here.
www.iliadtower.com


Click on this link for a more detailed description
liverpoolvision (http://www.liverpoolvision.co.uk/actionareas/limestgateway.asp)

Thanks Juxtapol & T0M

On the liverpoolvision is says there is a resident's terrace at the top? That would be a stunning feature :cool:

The building looks a lot taller than its storey height but I guess that is down to the adjacent architecture. Personally I wouldn't want it to be much taller - the narrow cylinder (oval) works well with the historic surroundings and makes it very graceful. Any bulkier and it would dominate IMO.

I also think this has got to be one of the nicest towers proposed/underway in the UK. And I LOVE the colour :)

He said interesting, yeh meff...

Cheeky! Without the Rotunda.... well ;)

Anyway, the old girl is having a refit and she is beginning to look fabulous. Slight tint of mint green in the cladding and floor to ceiling windows courtesy of Glenn Howells working with the original architect and of course Urban Splash. Not bad for a 40 year old!

Who is Ilaid's architect and developer?

I would like to see more round towers (but not too many of course!)

I seem to recall this tower's architect is Glenn Howells as well...

...and this would seem to confirm it:

http://www.skyscrapernews.com/buildings.php?id=441

Ah - that would explain the bronzed colour (he is doing a 14 storey office block in Brum clad in Bronze aluminium).

Mr Howells has a penchant for all things round too it seems :)

Thanks for that Damon :cheers:

Ah - that would explain the bronzed colour (he is doing a 14 storey office block in Brum clad in Bronze aluminium).

Mr Howells has a penchant for all things round too it seems :)

Thanks for that Damon :cheers:

I've seen the renders for that, it's looking good!

i noticed while shopping in the city tonight a huge banner on the concourse tower outside lime street station advertising www.iliadtower.com, i have tried the link and it does not work, or at least there is nothing there yet. I will be keeping a check on it as i am sure you will too. Hopefully it will provide some new images and information on the project when it goes live!

seems to be online now. just a front page though

ive been checking out the tower on http://www.iliadtower.com and with the halo it equals about 30 stories, the halo is a tad more than 2. so trust me 85 is bull it willl be more like 90-95m

Great shots Chansau and welcome.

Would look even better if they added an advert to the other side, looks like an impressive advertising board. :cheers:
http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m30/chansau/DSC01626.jpg

Actually looks really good as an advertising board!!! kind of like Fort Dunlop in Brum. Perhaps the Plaza would make a good advertising board???

So by Coming soon and the original property now being empty, does that mean this is on for starting soon? Not heard much on this tower for a long time so I dunno if its circumstances have changed..

Yes Ferge!

Quote Red Scousers about a week ago

'Lime Street revamp to go ahead
Oct 10 2006
Liverpool Echo

THE government has confirmed compulsory purchase orders on shops at Lime Street station which should allow work to start on a £46.5m revamp by next spring.

A public inquiry into plans to demolish the row of shops in front of the station approved the orders earlier this year, and the Secretary of State has now confirmed the order.

A spokeswoman for the developers said they hoped to begin demolition work on the shops and the Concourse tower block by late spring next year.'

All system GO!

Looking at those pictures I think this area is PERFECT for 'times square' or 'picadilly circus' style advertising. The side of the Holiday Inn would be perfect for a huge advertising screen rather than the 2D adverts that they have up at the mo. Fair enough I know they cover grubby boring buildings but the council or developers should MAXIMISE the potential of these sites. I think this is something that is not done well in Liverpool, and thats maximising the potential of many buildings, squares etc. A long with the side of this building the old ABC cinema could make for a excellent 'Hard Rock Cafe' style attraction, maybe even keeping one of the screens to show huge blockbusters therefore making Lime Street a real bustling street. The outside of the cinema could be covered in neon lights and even news runner's which time square have. The echo have tried this again though it doesn't have any quality effect. Just a cheap news runner that flashes Liverpool Echo.

Why don't the council have an agency, like a sort of thinktank that could put these ideas forward to potential investors and companies. When walking round the city I see many sites that are just lacking the forward-thinking positive ambition that could drive them into being world-class.

Anyone like those ideas? Got any ideas of your own?

Looking at those pictures I think this area is PERFECT for 'times square' or 'picadilly circus' style advertising. The side of the Holiday Inn would be perfect for a huge advertising screen rather than the 2D adverts that they have up at the mo. Fair enough I know they cover grubby boring buildings but the council or developers should MAXIMISE the potential of these sites. I think this is something that is not done well in Liverpool, and thats maximising the potential of many buildings, squares etc. A long with the side of this building the old ABC cinema could make for a excellent 'Hard Rock Cafe' style attraction, maybe even keeping one of the screens to show huge blockbusters therefore making Lime Street a real bustling street. The outside of the cinema could be covered in neon lights and even news runner's which time square have. The echo have tried this again though it doesn't have any quality effect. Just a cheap news runner that flashes Liverpool Echo.

Why don't the council have an agency, like a sort of thinktank that could put these ideas forward to potential investors and companies. When walking round the city I see many sites that are just lacking the forward-thinking positive ambition that could drive them into being world-class.

Anyone like those ideas? Got any ideas of your own?



Hi Ste,

yeah lovin the whole "ThinkTank" idea, and the old Forum/ABC cinema is such an amazing building, IMO, it begs for something classy be done to it. I think a Hard Rock Cafe would be spot on fot this building or alike, Planet Hollywood perhaps?

It was rumoured a while back that Liverpool football players where looking into a Football themed restaurant, on the same lines of Hard Rock but football based for this site? Hard Rock wuld be so cool though.




www.squible.co.uk

Hi Ste,

yeah lovin the whole "ThinkTank" idea, and the old Forum/ABC cinema is such an amazing building, IMO, it begs for something classy be done to it. I think a Hard Rock Cafe would be spot on fot this building or alike, Planet Hollywood perhaps?

It was rumoured a while back that Liverpool football players where looking into a Football themed restaurant, on the same lines of Hard Rock but football based for this site? Hard Rock wuld be so cool though.




www.squible.co.uk


It is amazing that a city with such a close link to popular music doesnt have a Hard Rock. There were rumors that they were looking at a site in Grosvenors L1. I agree that the ABC would make an ideal site .

I seem to recall that a number of developers were stalled while Liverpool Vision grabbed the building supposedly for something for 2008 but no sign of anything happening.

Unfortutely I think the Lime St area will be the worst eyesore area during 2008 from what I can see. Not that we should rush just to do something now but the whole bit from the station to the 051 is a disgrace.

Looking better already!!


http://img235.imageshack.us/img235/4110/dsc03579yn2.jpg (http://imageshack.us)


http://img54.imageshack.us/img54/9041/dsc03587qm0.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Unfortutely I think the Lime St area will be the worst eyesore area during 2008 from what I can see. Not that we should rush just to do something now but the whole bit from the station to the 051 is a disgrace.

A developer was discussing that area, with an exclusivity agreement so no one else comes in to side swipe them. Haven't heared anything for years/months, on what has been going on though.

great pics Doug, really getting an idea as to what will be! What an entrance to the city that will be.



www.squible.co.uk

The advertising board has blew off in the wind (not sure which side)! The whole area was closed off while it was sorted. That didnt last long!

Bit tacky calling it Iliad Tower after the developer!

Bit tacky calling it Iliad Tower after the developer!

It's not a bad name taken on it's own, but is irrelevant to the site. It doesn't mean much, but is maybe a temporary thing just to advertise the development. Concourse Tower is a very 60s harsh name, wonder what we will all be calling it in 10 years time, irrespective of developers "It's meant to symbolise" name.

It looks good on that advert, can't wait to see it built

Bit tacky calling it Iliad Tower after the developer!

If they are putting the money up they can call it what they like as far as I am concerned. Noone seems too worried about Beetham and they could have called their tower something that acknowledged the former hospital on their site.

That said it would be nice to have something that has some links to the area - what used to be there before Concourse House?

I would rather Iliad tower rather than some bland thing like Gateway Tower - reminds me of fresian cow coloured comuputers.

If you don't like Iliad - how about Homer House ?? or would that be a tragedy?

Seriously though, naming/branding is a really emotional thing - I was responsible for branding for new company a few years ago and it was hell.

It was rumoured a while back that Liverpool football players where looking into a Football themed restaurant, on the same lines of Hard Rock but football based for this site? Hard Rock wuld be so cool though.


Hard Ball? ;)

The ad looks (looked) good on the side of Concourse House.

What is the official address of Iliad/Concourse? Maybe it will just become Number 10 Lime Street or something?

The advertising board has blew off in the wind (not sure which side)! The whole area was closed off while it was sorted. That didnt last long!

i think it was on the side nearest to the Adelphi, at least as it appears to be by looking at it from the roof top of the old 'open' (soon to be primark) store on church street.

Hi all, havnt posted for months, been busy, checked out the planning explorer and noticed that Cheiftain Construction are back in with another planning apl. for Skelhorne St. not sure how it compares to the last one, it was sent in on the 11th Nov.

Hi all, havnt posted for months, been busy, checked out the planning explorer and noticed that Cheiftain Construction are back in with another planning apl. for Skelhorne St. not sure how it compares to the last one, it was sent in on the 11th Nov.

Excellent it'll be at a much reduced height I'd imagine,I think that site already has outline PP for a smaller tower.

Yes, its definetley reduced I can tell you that. Its basically gone back to what was originally intended for the entire site which is a block slightly higher than the Student halls that sit adjacent.

There is a larger emphasis on glazing the area facing Lime St Station. It unfortunately another compromise to satisfy the vertigo suffering council. Another for the list im afraid which is getting worryingly longer all the time!

as much as i am annoyed it didnt get through at 32 stories, a say 18-20 glazed front will be better for people entering liverpool than them sudent accom

cant help but agree with SY on this, chieftan would be nearly built if it were not for the council on this.

Again look how much the scheme they have backed as done... it just a big fu*kin banner hanging off a building....

More backhanders me thinks!

Hi all, havnt posted for months, been busy, checked out the planning explorer and noticed that Cheiftain Construction are back in with another planning apl. for Skelhorne St. not sure how it compares to the last one, it was sent in on the 11th Nov.

Cheers begsy for this info, very interesting to compare the 3 applications that Chieftain have submitted:.............

First: 160 bed hotel in 12 storey tower
153 apartments in 32 storey tower
27 car park spaces.

Second: 180 bed hotel in 14 storey tower
159 apartments in 28 storey tower
46 car park spaces

New application: 150 bed hotel
125 apartments
39 car park spaces

No indication of how many storeys, but from applications 1 & 2, the hotel
could be 11 storeys and the apartment tower could be around 22.
They could of course "shuffle the mix" and we get 2 towers of around 15 storeys. Now this would make the height police much happier :ohno:

if there is 5 apartments per floor then it is 25 stories, so who knows

if there is 5 apartments per floor then it is 25 stories, so who knows

I'm pretty sure they've put a 14 storey limit on that site.We'll have to wait and see.

This is an interesting twist in this long running saga, I can't believe Chieftain would go through the pain of another planning application without having the nod from LCC. Maybe Warren has directly intervened in order to show Liverpool's business friendly side, as previously mentioned could be more for Stumpsville.

Maro should speak to Chieftain about dealing with LCC planning process, who knows from that could we see a third application for Brunswick??

Trust me, planners are not wanting this to interfere with The Gateway tower, and, along with english heritage are chipping and chipping away at this project because THEY want 12 storeys.

Its another insulting kick to Chieftan who i would loose no respect for if they picked up and went down the M62 were they would probs have about 4 towers by now.

What on earth are the planners thinking? are they really that short sighted and narrow minded?

Liverpool is, as ive mentioned before still far from the position or tampering and infuriating architects/developers.....

its always a case of......

Architect: "I want to do this"

Planner: "no, this is Liverpool, WE will tell you what we want you to do, and
you will like it"

the council should be ashamed of the way chieftan have been treated....

thier own flag ship tower will be lucky if its started by 2008... chieftan would have been finsihed with hotel makeing a contribution to the economy.

I still think that we may see 20 stories plus on the apartment side, its not the biggest site in the world so to fit a hotel and apartment building in then it will be necessary to build up!

its at 18 at the moment and the planners are wanting blood

Bet you any amount you want its 18 or less.......

i have a reliable source!

Transformation of Lime Street Station under way

A MAJOR revamp of Liverpool’s Lime Street Station got under way yesterday, in a project that will transform the city centre’s main transport hub.

The £2m scheme will give the interior of the station a facelift before the city’s Capital of Culture year with work expected to be completed by May next year.

Millions of travellers entering the gateway to the city will see modernised information screens and a fresh interior of the Grade II listed structure.

Improvements will include a new southern concourse for the station, new flooring, new information screens, a relocated taxi rank, extra cycle parking, extra seating and new disabled spaces created in the short stay car park.

Cllr Mark Dowd, chairman of Merseytravel, said: “Lime Street Station is such an important gateway for the region, and first impressions are important.


“At the moment, the impression we are giving the millions of people every year isn’t great, particularly inside the station.


“The station flooring adjacent to the trains has remained untouched since before Beatle Mania. Our investment will help to change that.


“Lime Street Station is going to be very important over the next two years, with Liverpool’s birthday and the 2008 celebrations, but this is also about leaving a lasting legacy of improvement that will shape people’s perceptions for many years to come.”
Network Rail, on behalf of Merseytravel, will carry out the work near to Platforms 7, 8 and 9 over the next six months.

Neil Scales, chief executive and director general of Merseytravel, said: “We will be working to ensure we cause very little disruption while these internal works take place, but they are important if Lime Street Station is to reflect the changing, growing face of Liverpool and the wider region.”

In the new design, contrasting coloured flooring tiles will define the walkways and seating areas and slip-resistant ceramic tiles will modernise the inside of the station.

The taxi pick up/drop off point for the station will be relocated from the existing Lord Nelson Street side to the Skelhorne Street part of the station.

And the screen that separates the south concourse of the station will be relocated for better access to the platforms and to the Skelhorne Street entrance and exit of the station.

Once completed, the short-stay car park will include 29 spaces, including four blue badge spaces.

So, new flooring at the entrance end of the southern train shed, but not on the platforms themselves. A few new info screens and precious little else.

No work in the northern trainshed - so no extension into the Northwestern Hotel buildings as promised, no new booking office and info centre there. No removal of the current barrier in the north shed that ruins the effect of the station roof, as promised either.

i agree Awayo, major work? The echo exciting itself again....

2 Million is by far a joke in terms of the scale a gateway needs.

It just shows priorities again.

Manchester Gets Picaddilly COMPLETELY overhauled in time for Commonwealth
games even though its was a short event compared to city of culture YEAR.

London has been allocated MILLIONS for the cross rail link, not to mention
St Pancras redevelopment.

To be honest, most of the development in Liverpool is private investment
that would have happened regardless of city of culture anyway.

The government and the bodies that distribute the cash via them wont even give us extra police in 2008, let alone resurface what are now black, pidgeon-dashed platforms in a cold, dark, dungeoness station which says one thing to visitors - DIRTY

again, we have been short changed.

2 million will just cover engineering costs no doubt!

Pathetic

That station is in need of a real world class redevelopment. I would much rather have seen the money that is going into the tower used to renovate the station interior, despite liking the tower, this is to the tune of £34 million. It may have been better to have knocked down concourse house, had the steps and maybe a water feature and used the tower cash on a real experience at that station.

the Chieftan tower could then have filled the void in its original design!

Again, idiotic planners raving about a GATEWAY making lime st an amazing entrance to the city - once you have cleaned the soot and chewy of your feet from the platforms, shivvered with cold, manouvered a cramped ticket check space (were the staff gab and tell you to pay on board most of the time...then, dodged a hand full of undesirables hanging around looking for a challenge.......

gateway! more like backway! im sorry, but lime st will NOT be up to scratch until:

A: we have increased capacity
B: the signalling is brought up to date (which no engineer, ie, EC Harris etc understands)
C: The platforms are cleaned and replaced
D: Longer opening hours
Sealed, HEATED AREA for passengers

and the removal of the BIG BLACK WALL that blocks the impressive design of the north shed and the introduction of something more like piccadilly in Manc, something which, as ever, has been given preferential treatment, with more work and money spent on it in a much shorter window of time!

Talk about loss of objectivity!! £2m might just about re-furb the bogs, I've e-mailed Kate Mansey and suggested she needs to curb her enthusiasm for the use of over excitable terms in her reporting.

I don't know if any of you have visited Manchester Picadilly but it is a magnificent, clean, bright and exciting gateway, full of shops and very modern feeling. It would impress any visitor. Likewise, Leeds is also an enormous station, which whilst less impressive than Manchester's received massive investment and redevelopment a few years ago. Again, the feel is modern and grand, with lots of shops.

Liverpool station, apart from having an impressive canopy, which most people probably won't take any notice of, is small, dark, dingy, underwhelming and just generally lacking. Hopefully the feeble £2m upgrade will make it easy for passengers to leave as quickly as possible before their impression of the city is ruined. It amazes me that the owners do not take advantage of advertising to raise funds in there. After all there is lots of space doing nothing.

Liverpool isnt the only major station which has been victim of no funding. Preston has suffered greatly from lack of investment. Virgin are starting a refurbishment of the station over the coming weeks as part of an upgrade to accomodate their new trains, but I'm not convinced.

Liverpool's a big city though, you expect better.

A 'non-regional capital' at a terminus. Do you think?

I find this unbelievable. As someone who thought that tower was in the wrong place (far to close to St Georges Hall and out of proportion to Lime Street) the only justification I could see for a taller tower (or any tower) there was to create commercial space and offset the costs of renovating Lime Street station. I went to the exhibition, and formed the impression that these two things were connected. Was that not right? If so, what justification is there for the tower? And why did they reject the second tower when they might have obtained funding through it towards cost of Lime Street? Did they not know then that they lacked the funding to pay for a decent renovation? Are LCC planners immune to all common sense?

A small station near where I work had several million spent on it a few years ago, just to spruce it up, and it's just a local commuter station. I do hope that £2m figure is a typo, and the real figure is £20m (itself not a huge sum these days). It would be an utter disgrace if Liverpool didn't get a half-decent make-over of Lime Street as part of its re-launch to the world.

I'd definatley put this tower on hold if there is no gain to the station renovation, and demand a revised development that will contribute funds to the renovation.

As I understand it, the tower helps pay for the redevelopment of the frontage of Lime Street and the removal of the shops.

What we should be getting angry about is that Merseytravel is having to pay for this upgrade of Lime Street Station, i.e. we are paying for it through our Council Tax!

The rebuilding of Manchester Piccadilly, Glasgow Central, Birmingham & the london stations was paid for by Railtrack/NetworkRail, and it was promised that liverpool would eventually get the same treatment. Now Network Rail refuses to carry out major improvements unless they can get a return on the investment i.e. build a shopping centre!

My source in Merseytravel tells me that part of the reason they are moving the taxi rank is so that shops can be built at that end, and hopefully give Network Rail a commercial reason to upgrade the station.

So London gets the £6billion Crossrail, the Overground and other new rail links to help with the Olympics & the Government won't even pay for a few buckets of tarmac to resurface the platforms of the Capital of Culture's main gateway!

The rebuilding of Manchester Piccadilly, Glasgow Central, Birmingham & the london stations was paid for by Railtrack/NetworkRail, and it was promised that liverpool would eventually get the same treatment. Now Network Rail refuses to carry out major improvements unless they can get a return on the investment i.e. build a shopping centre!

!

In all fairness, the other stations do practically have shopping centresd within them, and this is a good thing for passengers. So if this is what Network Rail need as an incentive to make the station half decent then I don't see why this shouldn't happen. Assuming your informiton is correct.

I'm not a fan of Manc Piccadilly. Reminds me of the new part of Bootle Strand. Was there at 2am a few weeks back and it was full of homeless people mooching around those waiting for the next train. It still seems very provincial and small compared to Lime Street.

Lime street, dirty and cold as it is, seems to be more of a destination, a railway station, whereas Piccadilly resembles a shopping centre with a train shed attached.

In all fairness, the other stations do practically have shopping centresd within them, and this is a good thing for passengers. So if this is what Network Rail need as an incentive to make the station half decent then I don't see why this shouldn't happen. Assuming your informiton is correct.

Fair point, but I don't think Merseytravel should have to pay to create the opportunity for them. It's £2 million that could have been spent on building a new station on Merseyrail or a few extra park & ride sites. Together with scraping Meseytram, it just another broken promise to Liverpool

So London gets the £6billion Crossrail, the Overground and other new rail links to help with the Olympics & the Government won't even pay for a few buckets of tarmac to resurface the platforms of the Capital of Culture's main gateway!

Careful Captain, don't want PrizeMazda logging onto this thread & giving it his North vs South thing again...

If shops are to be built at the Lord Nelson St end of the station, then surely the black monstrosity that blights the views of platforms 1-6 could finally be removed & something put in it place, akin to what has been done at Mcr Piccadilly. I hope to god that £2million is indeed a typo though... Lime Street is one of the worlds oldest passenger stations & a great piece of arctitecture, which should be treated with the respect it deserves. Come on Network Rail - get your hands in your pockets & cough up the dosh!

Fair point, but I don't think Merseytravel should have to pay to create the opportunity for them. It's £2 million that could have been spent on building a new station on Merseyrail or a few extra park & ride sites. Together with scraping Meseytram, it just another broken promise to Liverpool

I thought you were implying that Railtrack would invest properly if they could get a return, i.e. if they were allowed to build shops. I don't see any problem with that. It is only fair that Railtrack should want to get a return on their money, they have to fund themselves like all other agencies, companies, etc.

If this is a case of Railtrack not being allowed to develop a money spinner to finance renovations then surely the blame lies at the local level.

I thought you were implying that Railtrack would invest properly if they could get a return, i.e. if they were allowed to build shops. I don't see any problem with that. It is only fair that Railtrack should want to get a return on their money, they have to fund themselves like all other agencies, companies, etc.

If this is a case of Railtrack not being allowed to develop a money spinner to finance renovations then surely the blame lies at the local level.

No one is stopping them locally, as I said Merseytravel are being forced to spend £2million to start the ball rolling before Network Rail even considers creating the new retail.

Don't forget Network Rail isn't a private company any more, it is indirectly government controlled.

Its unbelievable whats happening with Lime st

Its PACKED everynight as I have found commuting between Manchester and Liverpool every night for work.

Its yet another example of the managed DECLINE of Liverpool that we have until the last few years witnessed that gave no thought to long term growth, just sustained, steady decline. Hence cutting back routes, fewer trains, gross underinvestment in facilties.........

Even now, we all know 2 Million wont go very far, infact not very far at all.

The toilets, the "black Box" the ticket booths/entrance, the underground facilities.....all need doing.

But most of all, THE PLATFORMS! they are cold, damp, badly lit havens for pidegeons. The concentration camps had better atmosphere than these places.

Liverpool has been short changed again phenomenally......its going to be a long fight yet to get the money spent that the city now deserves.

Here's what should have happened:

30 Million pound tower - NO

Pump funds from this tower into the station giving it a REAL makeover
Then build the steps and waterfeature allowing the whole original facade to dominate lime st.

And, we could still have a tower, just substitute the need for a 'node' at Lime st station with the Cheiftan/falconer chester tower which has been reduced after starting out at a much bigger height, and, ironically, within the TALL BUILDINGS ZONE with the council once held so dear!

You never know, any funds left over could have given the underground a make over too, creating a world class hub at Lime St.

Liverpool is frustrating, it has a far more impressive Architectural legacy than our neighbours, and yet, its like a mothballed museum that is having the dust blown off it. Lime St is far more interesting and has far more potential as an awe inspiring gateway and message to visitors of the new liverpool! Manchester is light and airy and im hoping that the new flooring in lime st gives the same effect, althought if the echo is right, its only platforms 6-9 so those travelling locally wont feel any difference, the london goers will!

Leeds is odd, quite a large station but they went a bit over board with the refurb leaving very little if anything of the original structure in favour of an airport style shed which is looking dated already.

Just thankgod everyone that we were spared from the idiots who thought birmingham new street in its current form was a good idea!

No one is stopping them locally, as I said Merseytravel are being forced to spend £2million to start the ball rolling before Network Rail even considers creating the new retail.

Don't forget Network Rail isn't a private company any more, it is indirectly government controlled.

Well I don't think there is anythng wrong with that. Unless other cities got it all for nothing and local PTE's didn't have to get the ball rolling. Merseytravel is a local stakeholder in the city's transport network and so why shouldn't they put some money in?

The fact that Network Rail is not private matters little. Modern public services try to be sustainably financed, and that is something I agree with.

Well I don't think there is anythng wrong with that. Unless other cities got it all for nothing and local PTE's didn't have to get the ball rolling. Merseytravel is a local stakeholder in the city's transport network and so why shouldn't they put some money in?

The fact that Network Rail is not private matters little. Modern public services try to be sustainably financed, and that is something I agree with.

That's the point, Manchester, London stations and I think Glasgow all got revamped stations paid for by Railtrack (as it was then) Liverpool was left out until just before they changed the rules. Lime Street wasn't even counted as a "Major Station" until about 4 years ago (i.e. it was operated by Virgin Trains instead of by Railtrack) hence no investment apart from the virgin "portacabin".

Found this in the Network Rail business plan. http://www.networkrail.co.uk/documents/3118_Route%2020%20North%20West%20Urban.pdf

There are two station improvement schemes
planned at Liverpool Lime Street. The first is known as Liverpool Lime Street Gateway which looks to improve the front of the station, in particular
opening up the frontage area and replacing the existing Concourse House. This scheme is being funded by Liverpool Vision, English Partnership
and a third party developer. The second improvement scheme is being funded by Merserytravel, who are planning works on the internal area of the station. This will concentrate on the south concourse, including its resurfacing and
establishing retail outlets on the old cab road. Improvements to the short stay car park, including relocation of the taxi rank are also planned as part
of this scheme. We are investigating the case for improving retail facilities at the station.

if you look through the business plan you will see further improvements for both Manchester stations, but paid for by Network Rail

Didn't network rail make a profit for the first time ever this year. They made 750million if i remeber correctly, but they didnt know if they should reinvest it into the train network, or to pay off their huge debt. They also asked the government for 26 billion in extra subsidies, ontop of what they already get per year

If you tell whats wrong with the large canvas picture ........


http://img445.imageshack.us/img445/450/ileadfg8.jpg





Its the wrong way round - the station is on the wrong side.

and no it wasnt the way I took it - it really is like this - it took me ages to figure out what was wrong.

must have been designed the planning dept :nuts:

If you tell whats wrong with the large canvas picture ........


http://img445.imageshack.us/img445/450/ileadfg8.jpg





Its the wrong way round - the station is on the wrong side.

and no it wasnt the way I took it - it really is like this - it took me ages to figure out what was wrong.

must have been designed the planning dept :nuts:

Looks ok to me , but then I am cross eyed:lol:

its back to front

yes, the images on concourse house where back to front in places. it seemed very disorganised and there was a space left for advertising (more profit) turning this tower into a giant advert stand. They have however been taken off bit by bit lately. Now the tower is naked again and looking like its been raided. All the windows, if you look, feature broken hand rails, the curtains are all messed up and it looks generally run down. The only problem is its too big to leave looking ,like that, and unfortunately, along with its family - lime st shops, st johns centre, clayton sq, lime st (cannon, blacklers etc) and that bad hotdog stand at clayton squae steps provide liverpool with a very very very bad, dirty, first impression from lime st.

Does anyone know why the ribbons project stops at the superdrug junction of church st???? the flooring near tesco has no plans for a new covering! it looks really bad. Even with the now approved TWO STOREY extension to clayton square/refurb and refurb of st johns, Land securities who own the two have no obligation as far as im aware to redevelop the public realm in around this area.

Im hoping that the tower hoardings coming down mean an early start on removing them shops and the tower.....

There is a more active search for a developer for the old cannon cinema

But the plans for clayton square and st johns still seem piece-meal despite the fact they are very busy and well used.

its a shame.

I'm not a fan of Manc Piccadilly. Reminds me of the new part of Bootle Strand. Was there at 2am a few weeks back and it was full of homeless people mooching around those waiting for the next train. It still seems very provincial and small compared to Lime Street.

Lime street, dirty and cold as it is, seems to be more of a destination, a railway station, whereas Piccadilly resembles a shopping centre with a train shed attached.


er, absolute tosh i'm afraid!

Manchester Piccadilly is both a quality station/destination, AND a decent shopping centre. The makeover a few years back was terrific - it's got to be one of the best appointed mainline stations in any major city - easily beats Euston, Victoria, Kings Cross, New Street, Waverley, Lime Street.
Likewise, Leeds station is equally good after the relatively recent refurbishments.

As for this tower proposal, I'm not even sure what the rationale is. Just because there's a (fricking awful) tower there at the moment, doesn't seem like a good reason to justify redeveloping with another tower. The areas around major stations inevitably end up being strange/shitty areas.
Yes, re-develop. With another tower? not sure. Think I'd rather see a quality tower elsewhere in the city, ie, nearer the central cbd cluster.

[QUOTE=scouseyuppie01;
Does anyone know why the ribbons project stops at the superdrug junction of church st???? the flooring near tesco has no plans for a new covering! it looks really bad. Even with the now approved TWO STOREY extension to clayton square/refurb and refurb of st johns, Land securities who own the two have no obligation as far as im aware to redevelop the public realm in around this area..[/QUOTE]

Yups, I think its just a question of phasing, Whitechapel (now that the Met Qt is finished )is next for public realm up-grade, and I would expect Clayton Sq area would get the same treatment AFTER the shopping centre extention. Also Land Securities have yet to publish their plans for St. Johns, so there is bound to be missing pieces of the jigsaw for a few years yet
I don`t think you can read to much into the fact that Land Sec. may not be contributing to the costs because almost all the costs ,todate, have been grants from the various agency`s.

With the forthcomoing redevelopments at Lime Street Station and Central Village, the public realm up-grades in time will spread right across the central area

The solution to this would have been simple (btw, i agree, picadilly is a nice station, and a good examlple)

The solution would have been not to build the new concourse house but demolish the shops and tower mess we have and focus the funds saved in a deal with network rail on the interior of the station.

Also, allow Chieftan to build the original tower on skelhorne st, therefore, lime st gets it new gateway icon and lime st gets the facelift is desperately needs and deserves.

instead, and as a result of idiotic and short-sighted planners we have:

The consistently shortened tower for chieftan with a loss of return and profit to that company and a resolve never to come and invest in Liverpool again with its hurdles, red tape and broken promises. Not to mention architectural fees for the site on skelhorne st as a result of the councils insistancy on a 15 storey tower:

Chieftain 'tower' now stands at 15 storeys with the planners pushing for a materiality similar to the adjacent student halls (white breeze block and prone to flood) and a new push recently to get the height of the proposal to 12 storeys. They are also insisting on the developers carrying out works on the approach to the student halls which is not in their remit/plot (blackmail) so its gone back to what the developer had at first wanted, a new block, but was then encouraged by planners to go taller resulting in chieftan paying out for this amendment/resubmission. This on the understanding it that a larger, taller tower would be approved. Now chieftan has been push into reducing the tower to the 15 storey stump on the skelhorne sit. this is a FACT

and we have a very small of amount of piecemeal clean up inside lime st, not a major gateway.

And to boot, non of this will be ready until around 2009. Another city leadership fuck up. They seem to get it wrong far more than they get i right. Does no one regulate them????

i would like to think that was the electorate, obviously not.....

I was looking at the Sheffield forum and was impressed by the station gateway improvements they have made so far. They have introduced truly stuinning public realm improvements outside their station consisting of a massive and beautiful water feature.

Liverpool is going to get a poxy eye with a tower that visitors won't even get anything from.

I was looking at the Sheffield forum and was impressed by the station gateway improvements they have made so far. They have introduced truly stuinning public realm improvements outside their station consisting of a massive and beautiful water feature.

Liverpool is going to get a poxy eye with a tower that visitors won't even get anything from.

Not sure about the Sheffield development. Unfortunately I haven't seen it in person but it looks a bit tricksy from here.
Something which'll look ok for 5-10 years, until styles change, lightbulbs don't get replaced, the water channels get dirty and clogged etc. Can't believe that sheet of metal's going to stand the test of time either.
Also the look of that whole station/block/square is still very much 'small town' in style, scale and setting. You can't really compare the grandeur of Lime Street's sheer metropolitan scale- renovated, developed, or otherwise- with that.

I do like the Howard St approach though with its blue-lit benches and those lamp-posts are quite special.

A spokesperson for Network Rail has just told a Commons Comittee that no more money will be spent on Lime st, "as there is no business case for it" but more money maybe forthcoming for Manchester. So get prepared to be travelling to London from Manchester, as investment increases there,so will the train frequency.I posted this in so many words a few weeks back but was corrected by Gareth. In the market money will only be invested where there is a return.

well, yet again, there is certainly a real issue here. They are MAKING a business case for Manchester and ignorning Liverpool. How much longer are local politicians gonna allow for us to recieve crums of investment.

THERE IS 3 BILLION POUNDS OF INVESTMENT IN LIVERPOOL AT THE MOMENT....

AN INCREASING POPULATION

NO BUSINESS CASE???? What on earth is going on???? What will it take for Liverpool to actually get the Whitehall treatment it needs?

http://icliverpool.icnetwork.co.uk/0100news/0100regionalnews/tm_headline=lime-street-cash-plea-turned-down%26method=full%26objectid=18425086%26siteid=50061-name_page.html

£2m at Lime Street, £110m at Manchester Piccadilly.....I think this guy is having some problems with his figures. I would love to see a business case for investing such a disproportionate sum in one station over the other, it would be contorting itself to make such an argument. As a through station serving a larger conurbation, I bet the business case is for more investment in Piccadilly - but 50 times more? I imagine at best it would be for at most double the amount, meaning that Lime Street should - if it is treated fairly - be looking at an investment of at least £50m. Someone should do a bit of FoI'ing and digging, and have this rogue dragged back to the Committee for a bit more questioning. He's made a claim to parliament, and the committee should ask for detail on that.

The sooner we start lobying for change around here the better. If warran bradley is worth anything he will get his finger out and find out what on earth is going on...........how is liverpool ever to have a business case if this kind of short change continues. No wonder Manchester see's such massive growth. There was no business case when they recieved 110 million for the picadilly overhaul, it was based on expectation for the commonwealth games. Does the government know something we dont? is there a hidden agenda? how much longer are we to loose out for Manchester? there has never been such a strong case for years for investment in Liverpool lime st....we must be seen as a real joke by the government even today. This is a city political leadership issue, they need to start demanding answers because.

BRUNSWICK QUAY
TRAMS

amongst other obvious knock backs in favour of our neighbours or London. Im wondering for how many more years they can justify doing this to Liverpool. Maybe a political sea-change is needed because the powers that be really dont want to give Liverpool what it deserves.....

There's probably a few things happening here. Merseyside remains most solidly Labour, so it can be happily ignored by the newlabouroids. However, folks living in the swing seats of Sefton Central and Wirral West should kick up a fuss and make sure the sitting Labour MPs for these seats know their feelings.

It's not just Liverpool that London-based bodies are trying to cut of from the rest of the country, it is everywhere in the Merseyside conurbation that has to travel to Liverpool before getting a train to London.

I can't help but smell our old bugbear, regionalism, lurking in the woods here. The upgrading of Manchester and downgrading of Liverpool goes well beyond business sense. The trains to Liverpool are rammed full, the more frequent trains to Manchester much less so. Their response: increase frequencies to Manchester. What is happening here? I suspect this insanity is a another result of the anti-common sense regional mindset yet again.

In the fantastical regionalist world view, there are not two big cities that have the need for a fast and frequent link to London, there is one "region". Network Rail is doing its best to serve the "region". By increasing frequencies and pumping investment into Manchester and its main terminus, they have invested hugely in the "region". What is anyone in the "region" complaining about?

Of course, there is no region. The UK's rail network was developed in the C19th more than a century before London bureaucrats had invented bogus regions. Naturally and sensibly, the rail network follows were people need to go, i.e., from city to city. So, big cities like Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds and Sheffield have direct train connections to London and very well used they are as well.

As the North West region is a fiction, concentrating all investment and train frequencies on one city on the eastern edge of the "region" does not help anywhere apart from the one part of the bogus region that actually is focussed on Manchester city centre, Manchester, and isolates everywhere else.

Much of the rest of the area arbitarily gathered into the "North West region" has its focus on the fourth largest city in England, Liverpool, for example, a city that, apart from all other considerations, does not even have a decent rail connection to Manchester.

The trains to Liverpool are rammed full, the more frequent trains to Manchester much less so. Their response: increase frequencies to Manchester.

Simply not true.

http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_railways/documents/page/dft_railways_032564.pdf

Pages 12 and 13.

It's a self fulfilling prophecy though, as Scouseyuppie mentioned above.

They invested a fortune into Manchester's station and the rail traffic passing through it. So people then start to use rail transport more on that route becuase there is a decent service available. And then consultancies produces reports saying "there is more demand there, so lets invest more into it!"

I for one can vouch for the fact that rail services to Liverpool are rubbish and so I avoid using that mode of transport to reach the city.

Really Metro, you are making school boy errors here. Read through the posts.

Confused, Metrolink. We'll ignore the document's "predictions" for the future that conveniently show travel demand to Manchester (a stop on their proposed HSL no doubt) going through the roof and Liverpool's stagnating. Do they know something we do not, will regionalism have had its final victory by 2030 and Liverpool have been killed off as an economic entity? Let us merely look at Figure 2.3. Remember this figure shows data from 2000, when a fairer split of frequencies between Liverpool and Manchester direct trains from London was in place and travelling to Liverpool from London by train wasn't quite as unpleasant an experience as it is today.

I imagine that all that you have to go on is the fact that the load factor on the Stoke to Manchester branch is lhigher than on the Runcorn to Liverpool branch of the WCML. Naturally, the train thins out as it gets further away from London. It appears that, back in 2000, the average train from Euston had a higher load when it reached its destination in Manchester, compared to that of the average train reaching Lime Street. Yes, and? The diagram does not show the average load of the Liverpool-bound trains the whole distance up the the country, compared to that of those arriving at Manchester.

Really, Kurt, this is your specialist subject. I know bugger all about this shit. My nerdy hobby is real ale. Please try harder.

Believe you me, if you travel frequently on Euston to Manchester and Euston to Liverpool, the Liverpool trains are far busier - a result of a mismatch in demand compared to frequencies, in the main I would guess, although it's possible that train lengths and other factors are relevant here also.

The poor service meated out to passengers using the Lime Street/Runcorn to Euston route has also artificially capped 'demand' whereas the Manchester route has become more attractive due to the investment that's gone in to it. You can create demand just as you can curtail it.

I'm not a regualr traveller to London these days but when I was it used to piss me off when the Liverpool train would be chocker block and held up so the half empty Manchester train could be cleaned and turned around on time - remember Virgin have been competing with Manchester Airport for years on that service.

As for projections, let's consider the regionalists attempt to justify growing Ringway at the expense of Speke and what the market has actually demanded since then.

What can we do about it though?

As for projections, let's consider the regionalists attempt to justify growing Ringway at the expense of Speke and what the market has actually demanded since then.

Good analogy!

What can we do about it though?

Change the governence of the UK.

Network Rail are tossers. As Martin G has pointed out, NR are looking at expanding Manchester Piccadilly with more platforms, yet the government has made no committment to the one station that the government has spent virtually zilch on since it was built - New St.

If there isn't a business case for that (a station that handles 1350 trains a day), then I don't know what is.

Don't hold your breath my Liverpudlian friends.

We're not.

The key is building routes to major European, North American and Asian cities via Liverpool Airport to break the provincial chains and become a global trading hub again.

Regionalism and Londoncentric policy can eventually fuck itself over.

Hey, it's Babybio!

Exactly, why is Manchester London's pampered pet to such a ridiculous degree? It goes beyond the awful anti-Liverpool "North West" regionalism. Birmingham, a city at least the size of Manchester, one that has actually been designated a "regional capital", and, unlike Manchester, actually is a more natural focus for what it's slightly less unnatural "region", doesn't get the special treatment that Manchester does.

A surfeit of New Labour shithead politicians in Greater Manchester - the loathesome Hazel Blears, that wart of a man, Phil Woolas, Beverley Hughes, Auto de fe Ruth? At least Lorna Fitzsimmons copped it. :lol:

Network Rail are tossers. As Martin G has pointed out, NR are looking at expanding Manchester Piccadilly with more platforms, yet the government has made no committment to the one station that the government has spent virtually zilch on since it was built - New St.

If there isn't a business case for that (a station that handles 1350 trains a day), then I don't know what is.

Don't hold your breath my Liverpudlian friends.

I was under the impression that New Street was being rebuilt by Network Rail
is that not the case? Is it wholly dependent upon government money being put in as well?

The poor service meated out to passengers using the Lime Street/Runcorn to Euston route has also artificially capped 'demand' whereas the Manchester route has become more attractive due to the investment that's gone in to it. You can create demand just as you can curtail it.

I'm not a regualr traveller to London these days but when I was it used to piss me off when the Liverpool train would be chocker block and held up so the half empty Manchester train could be cleaned and turned around on time - remember Virgin have been competing with Manchester Airport for years on that service.

As for projections, let's consider the regionalists attempt to justify growing Ringway at the expense of Speke and what the market has actually demanded since then.

That's it in a nutshell Toad. But the question has to be asked:Why haven't our local elected representatives,The Mersey Partnership and others challenged this? because they are all on board with the regional agenda.

^^Cllr Bradley isn't, bless him. Remember his, "we're better than Manchester but we aren't getting the inward investment that we should. We're going to change that", comments. Off the cuff, perhaps, but massively off-message with respect to the regionalist dogma.

A spokesperson for Network Rail has just told a Commons Comittee that no more money will be spent on Lime st, "as there is no business case for it" but more money maybe forthcoming for Manchester. So get prepared to be travelling to London from Manchester, as investment increases there,so will the train frequency.I posted this in so many words a few weeks back but was corrected by Gareth. In the market money will only be invested where there is a return.

This is the quasi public state making 'business cases' on asssumptions gleaned from soviet style 'plans'... it is not the effin market. If it where the market there would be money to tap the evident growth and/or create new potential... this is regionalism in gay abandon!

can someone explain to me please the logic behind this 'regionalism'.

How on earth can a policy or an ideal justify sucking the blood out of one city, Blatently and pumping it into another? who decided Manchester had the stronger case for all this cash? what evidence is there that this is sound investment in the long run? why does Manchester need so much money and why whould Liverpool loose out to fund it?

At what point was this idea created? and further more, what end result will there be? a fat, spoilt Manchester, clogged, congested and stuffed beyond its means.....and then to Liverpool, a skinny, thinned out, watered down shell of a great city fed peacemeal donations whenever local politicians need a view votes.

God, this city is SCREEMING out for a political power engine.....not a militant force but a force never the less that really PUSHES for change and gets what Liverpool needs.

At the moment we seem to have a lame duck local government who never seem to raise an eyebrow....too busy messing up tower proposals. If Liverpool council was a horse you would shoot it. We need a fresh outlook, the kind that has put places like Manchester on the map. If local politics had any balls we wouldnt need to set up 21C Liverpool.

Sad sorry state of affairs when we cant even get a train station for a major city like liverpool retiled after 46 years since the last paint job. Sorry state of affairs indeed.

:ohno:

How on earth can a policy or an ideal justify sucking the blood out of one city, Blatently and pumping it into another? who decided Manchester had the stronger case for all this cash? what evidence is there that this is sound investment in the long run? why does Manchester need so much money and why whould Liverpool loose out to fund it?


Its because we (the city of Liverpool) were receiving the EU grants due to the problems not addressed by Governments in the past.

The recent/present Government could not allow this city to gain precedent over the Mancs so decided to counter balance EU grants to Liverpool with grants to Manc.

Also, I would not be a bit surprised that senior Civil Servants are still in the decision making setting that were in place when Mrs T was in power.

the only consilation we have is that, unlike Manchester, we have managed to generate a massive amount of wealth and turn around in a shorter space of time and against the grain of what, as you have pointed out, is probably Mr's Thatchers residual influence.

Despite Goverment bias for Manchester, and lets not forget Whitehall creates this, not Manchester, Liverpool has still fought back in every way it can and developers are still wanting to come here, investment is still coming and we are seeing Liverpool Transformed.

So let them shower Piccadilly in cash. Manchester will never be Liverpool, will never have the magic and edge that Liverpool has, no matter how much money is thrown at it at Liverpool's expense.

The only people to whom the appearence of Lime St will matter, ie investors and developers, are educated and knowledgable enough to know that if Lime St is in tatters, look no further than our NATIONAL rail authorities and Whitehall.

Nice try, but they are gonna have to do better than this to push this insane regionalism non starter.:nuts: :lol:

This is the quasi public state making 'business cases' on asssumptions gleaned from soviet style 'plans'... it is not the effin market. If it where the market there would be money to tap the evident growth and/or create new potential... this is regionalism in gay abandon!

Pick your dummy up.It's the best of both worlds for private enterprise,public subsidy,public expenditure on infrastructure,a 600% increase in fares in 15 years. What are you on about "quasi public state" none of these private rail companies would've touched the railways without massive public investment and handouts.Let's see them run without subsidies and that goes for the other former nationalised industries that suffered from lack of investment under the Tories for years.If Merseyrail wasn't receiving huge subsidies it would cost about £20 to get in to town from Southport.

Hey, it's Babybio!

Exactly, why is Manchester London's pampered pet to such a ridiculous degree? It goes beyond the awful anti-Liverpool "North West" regionalism. Birmingham, a city at least the size of Manchester, one that has actually been designated a "regional capital", and, unlike Manchester, actually is a more natural focus for what it's slightly less unnatural "region", doesn't get the special treatment that Manchester does.


Hey Awayo! How you doing?

From here we don't get to see how funds are distributed in the North West so I guess we are more immune to the favouritism purported to be shown to Manchester. I don't know whether we are paranoid but there is a growing case for "anti-Birmingham" conspiracy in Whitehall rather than a "pro-Manchester", but that could well be different from your angle.

Mind you, the Lime St Tower looks very nice - when is that going to start?

I was under the impression that New Street was being rebuilt by Network Rail
is that not the case? Is it wholly dependent upon government money being put in as well?
Unfortunately, Network Rail has not spent a penny yet. Birmingham City Council and our transport body Centro have funded the design and investigations so far. Development agency Advantage West Midlands has pledged £100m, Centro another £100m, and we are to get something like £120m from the private sector in the way of land sales (the New St twin towers), but that still leaves a shortfall of something like £240m which we are wanting/hoping/expecting the DfT to provide (through Network Rail). We find out what the government has in store for railways in Birmingham in the summer apparently.

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

FWIW I think the hope of Liverpool Airport becoming a regional hub should be abandoned as it is obviously competing with Manchester. Of course develop routes that are in demand for Liverpool and Merseyside, but much of the geographical catchment is in the sea. I am not sure of your rail links, but a high speed rail link to Manchester Airport would probably do more for Liverpool.

Maybe the further development of Liverpool as a cruise liner port would also be advantageous with many passengers wishing to fly on from the seaport - is there a good link from the docks to the airport?

Regionalism probably has its oldest roots in the establishment of civil defence regions in WWII. There had never been any historic, cultural or economic regions in the UK anything like the current pattern of Government standard regions before then.

However, there is no reason whatsoever why the current bogus north west region has to be the one that Liverpool is placed within. There have been plenty of previous divisions of the country into regions by the government, public sector bodies, charities and private companies. In many, Manchester has been placed in its natural South East Lancs, North East Cheshire region with Greater Liverpool and North Wales in its. Often you'll find that organisations that are "bottom-up" rather than "top-down", i.e., local groups in, say, Liverpool and Manchester that start up and then link with their neighbours and form more natural groups, inevitably find themselves forming into these patterns. For example, the campaign for real ale that was founded by beer drinkers in the Wirral and Chester follows this sensible pattern.

Nearly all "North West" regional structures tend to be when a head office in London has decided to draw lines on the map and divided the country up, arbitrarily, into sixths.

A bunch of factors have increased the threat of regionalism in recent years, including: the EU, which uses regions as its base local unit, the establishment of government offices for the regions, regional assemblies and Welsh devolution, which hives of part of Liverpool commuter belt and cultural hinterland from the bogus region in which the city has been placed. Also, the firming up of one Government-defined "North West" as the official one for all agencies and the increasing centralisation what were previously local government and city metro functions (NHS, Ambulances, Fire and Rescue, potentially police, etc.) to the "regional" level, thus removing both the public sector jobs and (more importantly) the decision-making and influence from Liverpool.

Far from representing devolution from Whitehall, the experience of regionalisation in Merseyside has been for no powers to have been passed down from London but those powers and functions previously being exercised at the local or metro level being taken from Liverpool and passed to (largely unelected and unaccountable) quangoes outside of the city region.

Essentially, however, the problem is a symptom of Britain's over centralised top-down form of government. When Manchester and Liverpool were at their most successful relative to London, they were at their most independent. When a Liverpool engineer invented the world's first commercial wet dock, the corporation borrowed money and then financed it. Apart of securing an act of parliament to obtain the power to did the thing London was not involved.

WWII involved a massive centralisation of power and decision-making to London and the big, post-war state continued this process. Britain became partially Sovietised. Whilst, thankfully, this helped win the war and resulted in the welfare state and the NHS, these new huge public sector ventures were nationally-organised and directed from the top in London. Before this, great city corporations like Manchester, Leeds, Birmingham and Liverpool ran their own hospitals, managed their sewers, built their own roads, provided their own gas, leccy and water supplies. Also during this period, there was a leaching away of independent commercial life in the great cities to London. Tony mentions that much of this was state policy. Whatever the reasons, all the stock exchanges outside of London closed down, most of the banks (remember Liverpool was the number two banking centre as recently as the 60s) were merged with London banks, most large companies still present outside of London moved their hqs to London.

Manchester's relative success (and that's all its been) has been as the chosen "regional" hq for all of these now London-based national pubic sector bodies and companies when they have wanted to set up smaller outfits in the "regions". There's very little that is a result of local entrepreneural activity in that city.

So in short, London snaffled everything and then invented a, what in reality is a, multipolar region that included Liverpool and Manchester and give some of what was taken from both cities and others back to Manchester. This, of course, limits Manchester's potential as the maximum of what London will allow it to be as the prefectural hq of a fairly shite region of sheep, knackered milltowns and the emasculated centre of another city region but it shags Liverpool completely.

All of the other factors, trying to stop Liverpool airport growing and encouraging MAN, investing massively in Manchester's infrastructure but reluctantly, at best, in Liverpool's, ensuring that nearly every national body that has a "regional" office is based in Manchester, are all inevitable consequences of the basic problem of London running the rest of the UK like it is a colony, with Manchester designated "capital" of the "region" that no one who lived there would ever have previously thought existed.

Very eloquent! :applause:

I would add one exception to the above - I think Yorkshire has a very strong regional identity, and although there is a lot of rivalry within Yorkshire, it has the natural instinct to form a 'region'.

Mind you, the Lime St Tower looks very nice - when is that going to start?

A couple of shop owners that are occupying part of the site are after more money to vacate,when that's sorted this can continue.

Very eloquent! :applause:

I would add one exception to the above - I think Yorkshire has a very strong regional identity, and although there is a lot of rivalry within Yorkshire, it has the natural instinct to form a 'region'.

Not quite. I notice people in the likes of Sheffield and Leeds tend to have a loyalty towards their own cities, just like Liverpool and Manchester. In the young people especially, and the young are the future.

Best post i've read in ages Awayo!

I don't care what it sounds like and I don't care who listens! There is an anti-northern conspiracy in this country and most importantly an anti Liverpool conspiracy. CoC hasn't got read of the anti-Liverpool prejudice that is ever present in the UK. It was here in the 1980's/90's and it's here now. As Bluesnapper said earlier most of the Civil service that was in place in MT's day is still in-tact today, making the fucking decisions. This is the 'managed decline' that 'may or may not' have been metered out to us 20 years ago. ITS HAPPENENG NOW, this is it...2million compared to over £100 M! Give me a fucking break! I don't have a clue as to why Manchester is the preffered option? It was as crap and rundown as Liverpool in the 80's/90's, the government has created the so-called 'demand'. Im sick of this fucking hypocracy! What will it take for Liverpool to be taken seriously!? Even if we hosted the friggin Olympics we wouldn't get a dime! What is the answer someone please

:bash: >( :speech: :rant: :rant: :rant: :speech: >( :bash:

Pick your dummy up.It's the best of both worlds for private enterprise,public subsidy,public expenditure on infrastructure,a 600% increase in fares in 15 years. What are you on about "quasi public state" none of these private rail companies would've touched the railways without massive public investment and handouts.Let's see them run without subsidies and that goes for the other former nationalised industries that suffered from lack of investment under the Tories for years.If Merseyrail wasn't receiving huge subsidies it would cost about £20 to get in to town from Southport.

We're in the worst of both worlds when it comes to national rail and the old 'City Line'. Private companies are interested in profit, hence, we have the stupidly high prices, yet, the Strategic Rail Authority, a government agency, is deciding where these companies should run their trains. Incredible but true. If we had a purely non-regulated network, we'd still have the rip-off prices and under-invested infrastructure, yet I'm sure the market would justify more services than we currently get. Remember, we had more trains to London a decade ago, when the city was in a much poorer economic situation than it is today. Go figure!

As for Merseyrail, I don't think it's subsidised. If so, it isn't a cheap as it should be. The only things I'm aware are subsidied in Liverpool are the ferries, whose continued existence is purely down to it's fame and tourist status, and Merseytravel-operated bus routes where Arriva and Stagecoach can'tbe arsed running a service despite demand.

What happened to the 200 million the goverment promised was still available to Liverpool after the tram collapsed?

We're in the worst of both worlds when it comes to national rail and the old 'City Line'. Private companies are interested in profit, hence, we have the stupidly high prices, yet, the Strategic Rail Authority, a government agency, is deciding where these companies should run their trains. Incredible but true. If we had a purely non-regulated network, we'd still have the rip-off prices and under-invested infrastructure, yet I'm sure the market would justify more services than we currently get. Remember, we had more trains to London a decade ago, when the city was in a much poorer economic situation than it is today. Go figure!

As for Merseyrail, I don't think it's subsidised. If so, it isn't a cheap as it should be. The only things I'm aware are subsidied in Liverpool are the ferries, whose continued existence is purely down to it's fame and tourist status, and Merseytravel-operated bus routes where Arriva and Stagecoach can'tbe arsed running a service despite demand.

I'm pretty sure Merseyrail receives the biggest subsidy per passenger on the rail network.We had more trains 10 years ago probably through bigger subsidy.

Best post i've read in ages Awayo!

I don't care what it sounds like and I don't care who listens! There is an anti-northern conspiracy in this country and most importantly an anti Liverpool conspiracy. CoC hasn't got read of the anti-Liverpool prejudice that is ever present in the UK. It was here in the 1980's/90's and it's here now. As Bluesnapper said earlier most of the Civil service that was in place in MT's day is still in-tact today, making the fucking decisions. This is the 'managed decline' that 'may or may not' have been metered out to us 20 years ago. ITS HAPPENENG NOW, this is it...2million compared to over £100 M! Give me a fucking break! I don't have a clue as to why Manchester is the preffered option? It was as crap and rundown as Liverpool in the 80's/90's, the government has created the so-called 'demand'. Im sick of this fucking hypocracy! What will it take for Liverpool to be taken seriously!? Even if we hosted the friggin Olympics we wouldn't get a dime! What is the answer someone please

:bash: >( :speech: :rant: :rant: :rant: :speech: >( :bash:

Anti-Liverpool is another issue really. Regionalism, which is what's behind all this, is more pro-London than anything else. You could say that North West Regionalism is pro-Manchester and so, is automatically anti-Liverpool. But really, it's more about keeping London as the only real city in the UK, leaving artificial regions to be led by smaller insignificant cities, which will be content with their 'promotion'. It leave non-capitals like Liverpool literally nowhere. However, Manchester's fate is hardly within it's own sphere of influence, or Leeds' or Birmingham's. None of those cities are anywhere near London in terms of power and influence, so it's OK to make them it's little pets. If ever, however, any of those cities ever get anywhere near rivaling London in any real way, and despite hype from certain people from these cities they're nowhere near, they'll find the powers that be won't be too pleased about them daring to rise above their station as government rep for one of the many
miserable provinces of the London Empire.

What happened to the 200 million the goverment promised was still available to Liverpool after the tram collapsed?

In answer to your question Tommy, was £200 million available to us after the pulling of Merseytram? Was it fuck! That money will never come anywere near us I guarantee you. This government wants to shaft us good and proper, its got the whole country over a barrel, including Manchester! Only difference is, that the Mancs get paid to suck London's cock...

^^ Well said Gareth!

Only difference is, that the Mancs get paid to suck London's cock...

Yep, but if I was forced to suck cock, getting payed for it would be of very little comfort. I'd sooner not do it and go without payment.

Gareth and I aren't the first people to note that with the decline of the British Empire, Whitehall recovered by running the whole of the UK as a kind of rump empire. It is a common theme of political writers.

Historically England was much less centralised; boroughs such as Liverpool had been awarded rights from the king centuries ago that it no longer can exercise.

Why do "regions" make sense in a imperial context? Well, this is how the empire was run. The subjects of Indian princely states or the African colonies had no influence on the borders of the governmental regions in which they were placed. So what if the imperial borders cut across historical tribal or religious boundaries or if they divided areas and settlements off from their natural hinterlands and trading partners? After all, the boundaries were imposed by the imperial authority and were there not for the region's benefit but to enable the authority to easily subdue the subject populations and govern easily from the authorities' point of view.

On a divide and conquer principle, what better way to keep control of a region than to bring two rival peoples together and then pamper and advantage the more supine of the two? Worked a treat in Northern Ireland for fifty years, as well as scores of imperial territories. Of course as Her Majesty's loyal serfs, you're still at the bottom of the pile really, but you think you're better than those lazy, no good, taigs, Tamils, Shona or whatever.

Psychologists have studied such societies and noted that is always mediocre members of the advantaged group who are most desperate to assert that the Sinhales or Protestants or whatever are superior, because (a) they're too thick to realise what is happening and (b) they only way they can feel good about their debased existence is by kicking down at another racial, sectarian or tribal group. Sounds familiar, doesn't it?

I've been trying to get a simple table of figures - the rail station equivalent of airport passenger numbers. I can't find it anywhere. I know Piccadilly station is a bigger and busier than Lime Street, but I just can't believe it is 50 - 60 times busier. It might be two or three times busier maybe? I've been searching and searching and I cannot find this information. Maybe it is commercially confidential? There must be something somewhere on the net. Can someone with more nouse, or an expert on transport like Kurt, find the figures?

The Transport Select Committee website is hopelessly out of date, but a verbal transcript should appear of this session at some point, where we can see what the man actually said. But I cannot imagine any funding, operational, business-case or other scenario which can possibly justify investment of £110m on the Manchester rail gateway and £2m on the Liverpool one. We will probably be told we are comparing "apples and pears", or more literally a "then and now" situation, in which a more generous funding regime has now gone, but I don't accept that for one moment. I imagine that in reality these decisions are made in DfT, and it is from there that the money and permission flows, rather than Network Rail. DfT doesn't seem to like Liverpool very much, and seems to like Manchester an awful lot. They seem to have an institutional bias in fact.

Note also, that the 2m is from Merseytravel. Merseytravel are having to pay for the (modest) development of part of a station that is owned and managed by Network Rail.

A comparison of recent expenditure is therefore £110m against zero, in recent years. However, although the Network Rail bod was bendy with the truth when he claimed that the new Lime Street roof was recent (it was seven years ago and carried out by NR's predecessor, Railtrack), perhaps it is fair to include the cost of this in the money spent at LS. I can't find a cost for this work, but it cannot be more than £10m at the high end.

Piccadilly's passenger numbers are substantially higher than Lime Street's, but not infinitely higher!

Edit: Got them (http://www.rail-reg.gov.uk/upload/xls/stat_usage.xls)

Liverpool LS has passenger entries 5.1m; exits 6.1m. Manchester Picc's passenger entries 8.0m; exits 8.2m. That surprises me - they're much closer than I thought. What is this business case then?

Double edit: another spreadsheet (http://www.networkrail.co.uk/documents/3078_managedstationsfootfall.xls) gives total visitor numbers to Mcr Picc at 20.6m; Liverpool LS 17.25m. That's our comparison boys and includes all those visiting the station including non-passengers, i.e., folks likely to use all of the extra profitable shops, cafes and bars if a station redevelopment allowed Network Rail to maximise their highly rentable asset in Lime Street. This "business case" against investment gets more and more eccentric.

Gareth and I aren't the first people to note that with the decline of the British Empire, Whitehall recovered by running the whole of the UK as a kind of rump empire. It is a common theme of political writers.

Historically England was much less centralised; boroughs such as Liverpool had been awarded rights from the king centuries ago that it no longer can exercise.

Why do "regions" make sense in a imperial context? Well, this is how the empire was run. The subjects of Indian princely states or the African colonies had no influence on the borders of the governmental regions in which they were placed. So what if the imperial borders cut across historical tribal or religious boundaries or if they divided areas and settlements off from their natural hinterlands and trading partners? After all, the boundaries were imposed by the imperial authority and were there not for the region's benefit but to enable the authority to easily subdue the subject populations and govern easily from the authorities' point of view.

On a divide and conquer principle, what better way to keep control of a region than to bring two rival peoples together and then pamper and advantage the more supine of the two? Worked a treat in Northern Ireland for fifty years, as well as scores of imperial territories. Of course as Her Majesty's loyal serfs, you're still at the bottom of the pile really, but you think you're better than those lazy, no good, taigs, Tamils, Shona or whatever.

Psychologists have studied such societies and noted that is always mediocre members of the advantaged group who are most desperate to assert that the Sinhales or Protestants or whatever are superior, because (a) they're too thick to realise what is happening and (b) they only way they can feel good about their debased existence is by kicking down at another racial, sectarian or tribal group. Sounds familiar, doesn't it?

Spot on Awayo! Divide and conquer, those are the exact words that came up in my head, when I was thinking about all the regionalist bollocks yesterday! And manchestaaa is lovin it, lappin up every bit of it :tyty:

Liverpool LS has passenger entries 5.1m; exits 6.1m. Manchester Picc's passenger entries 8.0m; exits 8.2m. That surprises me - they're much closer than I thought. What is this business case then?


A perhaps obvious point to make, but not one yet mentioned in this argument, is the fact Manc' Picc' is a through station, whereas Lime Street is a terminus. The station's much more busier when you look at it from this perspective. Of course, passengers merely passing through Picc' won't be too bothered about a nice roof, nice lighting or shops, which should make it irrelevant, how the figures suit the cause, and the cause is not making business sense, we all know what it is and it begins with an 'R'.

Excellent work from Awayo. I didn't realise the stations were that close in their size either.

I guess this is more Olympics. Across the board, spending is squeezed on discretionary items to pay for those damn games. Every Department picks up part of the bill, which leaves less money for investment elsewhere. I imagine that if Paris had won the Olympics, Liverpool would now be getting its trams (at least one line) and Tony Blair would be personally visiting this month to launch the "Portal to Prosperity" project for Lime Street, a £60m renovation to create a "world-class gateway" to the forthcoming Capital of Culture.

Pick your dummy up.It's the best of both worlds for private enterprise,public subsidy,public expenditure on infrastructure,a 600% increase in fares in 15 years. What are you on about "quasi public state" none of these private rail companies would've touched the railways without massive public investment and handouts.Let's see them run without subsidies and that goes for the other former nationalised industries that suffered from lack of investment under the Tories for years.If Merseyrail wasn't receiving huge subsidies it would cost about £20 to get in to town from Southport.

apologies GV I wasn't meaning to have a go at you.... it just came out that way!

Thwe train companies are private, though they take their priorities and therefore projections for invesment etc from the SRA - uner current mindsets Liverpool does not appear on anybodies strategic anything... that was the point I was trying to make.

I guess this is more Olympics. Across the board, spending is squeezed on discretionary items to pay for those damn games. Every Department picks up part of the bill, which leaves less money for investment elsewhere. I imagine that if Paris had won the Olympics, Liverpool would now be getting its trams (at least one line) and Tony Blair would be personally visiting this month to launch the "Portal to Prosperity" project for Lime Street, a £60m renovation to create a "world-class gateway" to the forthcoming Capital of Culture.


Liverpool (and Birmingham) have missed the boat. Railtrack was splashing a lot of cash round on station regeneration before it was dissolved following the Hatfield crash.

At that time, Lime Street was not a Railtrack managed station, although the station, like all stations, was owned by the company.

Leeds and Glasgow, as well as Manchester, benefited from massive capital investment projects during this period.

Poor old New Street, a much bigger station than Picc, Leeds or Lime Street and in a worse state than Lime Street, also missed out on this largresse somehow, even though it was a Railtrack managed station at the time. I fear that everywhere can whistle for substantial investment from Network Rail for the next few years.

It does beg the question, however, just why did the network rail gimp when justifying the decision to spend bugger all on Liverpool say that investment could not be justified in Liverpool and could be in Manchester? Why bring up Manchester? Naturally it's just about the most inflammatory thing he could have said as well as - as can be seen by the very similar visitor numbers and their socioeconomic profile - patently incorrect. It's baffling.

We can wait until the ctte's minutes are posted to be sure, but I can only guess that the Southport MP might have asked him when Liverpool was going to get the same sort of investment that Manchester Picc had received. The truth is that what happened in Manchester in the 90s is irrelevant - nowhere is going to get the sort money that Railtrack was willing to spend the 90s. Unable or unwilling to give the real reasons he either lied, assuming that people would buy into an argument that super, prosperous Manchester is the sort of place where investment pays dividends, not like shithole Liverpool or he was so ignorant and not in command of his brief that he unthinkingly thought along similar lines itself.

The truth is the the millions spent on Manchester came at the time when Railtrack was flush with public money and there were political reasons why revitalising the Commonwealth Games city's main station might be thought well of by Whitehall (or Eland House in this case). The monies spent on the massive Piccadilly upgrade will not made back on the rents from the new Weatherspoon's and coffee shops in the new concourse any time in the near future, if ever. This was public money, spent for political reasons and long written off the balance sheet. "Business case" indeed. :nuts:

Liverpool (and Birmingham) have missed the boat. Railtrack was splashing a lot of cash round on station regeneration before it was dissolved following the Hatfield crash.

At that time, Lime Street was not a Railtrack managed station, although the station, like all stations, was owned by the company.

Leeds and Glasgow, as well as Manchester, benefited from massive capital investment projects during this period....



This rings a bell, some term like "nationally designated stations" or something was used for those that were not operated by rail companies.......but who bloody designated them and why? Why Leeds and not Liverpool? Has Liverpool lost £100m of investment because some official in DfT doesn't like it? Or was decision taken in Rail Track?

No use crying over spilt milk, some might say, but I don't agree - we need some recompense from the DfT for this, like £100m. Bastards.

Yes, Liverpool has fallen between two stools. Back when Railtrack was investing in stations Lime Street was not designated by Railtrack as a "Major Station". Non-Major Stations were managed, not by Railtrack, but by one of their train operators.

After some pressure from Liverpool City Council and/or other local bodies (I remember Mike Storey excitedly spilling the beans to the Echo on negotiations whilst they were still confidential, as is his wont), Railtrack (or it might have been Network Rail by this stage) agreed to upgrade Lime Street to "Major Station" status.

Obviously "stakeholders" in Liverpool were hoping for a whole lot of that regeneration action that Leeds, Manchester and Glasgow received. Initially Network Rail did promise to do so and were obviously maintaining the old Railtrack public policy that all Major Stations would be revamped. Unfortunately, it appears that Liverpool missed the boat, and after two or three years of promising investment Network Rail have 'fessed up that it's not coming.

I said "fallen between two stools" because those stations that have stayed under their operators' management have in several cases received more modest but not insubstantial revamps themselves, notably Sheffield and Newcastle. Hoping for the big prize of a Manc Picc style revamp, it appears that Liverpool backed the wrong horse and now won't get even the sort of works carried out in Sheffield and benefit from nothing more from Network Rail besides the new blue Major Station signs and signage.

apologies GV I wasn't meaning to have a go at you.... it just came out that way!

Thwe train companies are private, though they take their priorities and therefore projections for invesment etc from the SRA - uner current mindsets Liverpool does not appear on anybodies strategic anything... that was the point I was trying to make.

Wires crossed Tony.Apologies.

Couple of things.

No idea where this £100m figure has come from.

From memory the TOTAL cost of the project was in the region of about £60m, of which £30m was on the station (a very similar amount to South Parkway) and a further £30m on the office blocks in the area - which Railtrack (and now National Rail) occupy.

See http://www.ukbusinesspark.co.uk/rak92172.htm

John Laing were awarded the station part of the project or £30m.

Railtrack has awarded a £30m contract to John Laing to redevelop Piccadilly station in Manchester. 20-Jan-2000

The offices will have transfered into National Rail hands.


With regards what the guy from National Rail said on Monday evening, there was a report on BBC Breakfast News, North West Today which showed the committee questioning the bloke.

Essentially he was asked if there was any plans for major investment in Lime Street in the future by an MP from Southport.

His answer was that there is not a business case to spend large quantities of money on Lime Street, however, it may be the case that a business case may be there to invest in Piccadilly.

This is my take on what he said...

As others have said, the Railtrack days are gone, National Rail are not going to spend £30m on improving the cosmetics of any station in the near future, however, they wil spend it where there is a 'business case'.

The 'business case' I suspect he talks about in Manchester is the station is very very congested, practically at capacity - there are capacity issues at platforms 13 and 14 as well as at the junctions just outside the station at Ardwick and Longsight.

There are huge plans to close several hardly used heavy rail stations in Greater Manchester (the areas to be servered by tram instead) and to shift most of the local / regional trains over to Victoria, I get the idea that Piccadilly will be hand over more than the 4 or 5 platforms that Virgin currently have to the Virgin group.

I suspect the National Rail man was suggesting that projects, such as those to relieve the pressure at Piccadilly, MAY have a business case, however, National Rail are not able to create a business case for a cosmetic upgrade of any station.



EDITTED - according to the National Rail web site £27m was spent on the refurb in Piccadilly.

http://www.networkrail.co.uk/aspx/921.aspx#history

Between 1998 and 2000, over £27m was spend modernising Manchester Piccadilly station. Click here for more information.

^^I must say, if only £27m was spent, they got good value for money on Mcr Picc :)

I thought it was a terminus though? Trains can't go through it can they?

Public Notices in today's DP:

07L/0019- To carry out remodeling and refurbishment works in connection with use as hair salon at ground floor, Lime St Chambers (Head of Steam pub), application by Mr & Mrs Daley.

The Barbara Daley hair salon on the Lime St. concourse is one of the businesses that up till now have holding out against relocation. I think this is the first bit of movement for the removal of those remaining businesses.
I wonder if this means the pub is closing???

How about the other side of the hotel Doug? The pub is only on the north side of the main entrance, whilst the south side is boarded up and vacant.

Part of the south side of the Northwestern hotel ground floor contains the inner gubbins of the WHSmith's. Previously, the plan was to move the booking hall into this space and use all of the room available there. Not now happening, of course.

The Head of Steam is a vast pub, and split into different parts. It's never that full, either. It could easily lose one or two of its rooms. Maybe the whole lot is going, however. I note that the Head of Steam pub company has recently sold off its Euston outlet to Fullers. Maybe they are retrenching.

It's always packed out when there's a decent gig at the Carling Academy though.

Fair 'nough. I've been to Ma Egertons whenever I've been to a gig.

^^I must say, if only £27m was spent, they got good value for money on Mcr Picc :)

I thought it was a terminus though? Trains can't go through it can they?

Manchester Piccadilly is largely a terminus. It has 12 terminus platforms, and 2 through platforms. The money spent renovating only updated the terminus platforms (the through platforms needed to remain operational so only minor refurbishments were done on those).

I agree that Lime Street should have the money spent on it to make it into the gateway Liverpool deserves. I have one point to make which may have influenced the decisions though. Manchester Piccadilly had space outside to vastly increase the size of the concourse and hence the rental income the station generates from shops and restaurants. I may be wrong, but from my visits to Lime Street there doesnt seem to be room for massive expension to the concourse, and so there would be a reduced return on investment?

^^Hi Major. There were plans to expand into the lower floor of the grand Alfred Waterhouse hotel building that fronts the station building. Removing the unnecessary barrier/ticket office in the northern train shed would help in freeing up space also.

Now, if they really meant business, they could do what Madrid did in their main, Atocha, station, a building that reminded me very much of Lime Street when I visited it, and extend the platfroms back from the rear of lime street into the space behind it (before the cuttings and tunnels begin), thus leaving most of both trainsheds free for this kind of thing:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/5d/Atocha3.jpg

http://www-staff.it.uts.edu.au/~jenny/photos/madn/slides/old%20Atocha%20station,%20Madrid.JPG

Imagine tryin to pick-off terrorists in all that. You'd have to send the Gherkas in.

Sadly Villiers, the terrorists were lurking in the modern extension at the back. First thing in the morning, there would not have been many people relaxing in the tropical garden. A bomb there would have probably blasted only palm trees to bits.

Those gardens look wrong to me somehow. But i like the idea to open up the space. And it wouldnt cost too much either I would guess.

In general I am interested in restitution for Liverpool, and this sort of incident needs to form a part of that.

British Rail transferred regional administrative functions from Liverpool to Manchester, I think back in the 1970s, and the reason for this is not at all clear. Was it connected to a desire to be more proximate to Transport ministry regional officials in Manchester? Looking at the causation of moves, we frequently find that proximity to Government decision makers is influential, and that this has a multiplier effect, with other agencies then clustering, then the consultancies that form out of their former staff or set-up to serve them. Of course, it is entirely wrong that Government insists on governing Liverpool from Manchester anyway, and the purge of Government Office for Merseyside staff (who were thought not to demonstrate the requisite "northwesternism") proved that there was an aggressive anti-Liverpool agenda at work there.

So the Railtrack office that Kurt points to as part of the overall package for the redevelopment of Piccadilly Station is contentious and of relevance here. I believe that those offices should in any event have been returned to Liverpool, or at least some of them. Not only does it gift jobs, and fill office space, for Manchester, but it means that those involved in such decisions are based in a competitor city. Given relative property costs and labour availability, it surely cannot be value for money for National Rail to remain in that office above Piccadilly instead of relocating to one in Lime Street - they could only get a better deal by moving the jobs back to where they were taken from.

And then we need to find out just why Railtrack designated certain stations in the way Awayo has described, as having national priority. Were Manchester and Leeds chosen on the basis that they are - according to some - the undesignated "capitals" of phoney-regions that Government uses? Were regional officials of the transport ministry (not sure if it was part of DETR at that point) involved in those decisions? It's hard to imagine that they were not. In other words, Manchester-based Railtrack staff, dealing with Manchester-based "North West" transport ministry staff, must in my opinion have had an input into the decision that Manchester Piccadilly would receive priority over Liverpool Lime Street.

Archives - although always terribly incomplete - will exist for some of these decisions. Would make a great PhD topic for someone.

As a result of the decisions taken in and between Manchester and London, it seems that a major and hugely valuable redevelopment was gifted to Manchester, while Liverpool got virtually nothing and is now told it will get nothing in the future. Completely and utterly unacceptable. Over £100m capital investment of this nature (in 1990s prices) is a huge sum of money.

I am not one who believes a city should shrug this kind of thing off, and I believe that restitution is due. I believe that Liverpool City Council should prepare a statement on these matters and make a formal claim from DfT and its agencies for restitution. In this case, restitution for the lost jobs and lost investment that Government and its agencies favouring Manchester over Liverpool has created. This should become a political matter. If a Labour Government is so determined to do Liverpool down, then the electors of Liverpool and its wider region need to know about this.

Becasue the 'regional agenda' has been in play since the end of WWII. Even though the UK was not in the EC the intention was always to be so and to follow all of the core principles... i.e elimination of the nation state... a europe of the regions... with each having its own capital... none able to compete or veto Brussels!

In answer to your question Tommy, was £200 million available to us after the pulling of Merseytram? Was it fuck! That money will never come anywere near us I guarantee you. This government wants to shaft us good and proper, its got the whole country over a barrel, including Manchester! Only difference is, that the Mancs get paid to suck London's cock...

There is a piece in tonights Echo asking the question the council want to build a new station in kirkby and buy more trains with the cash.

Its Merseytravel not the council.