daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > European Forums > UK & Ireland Architecture Forums > Projects and Construction > Liverpool Metro Area

Liverpool Metro Area 'Scouse Scrapers for both sides of the Mersey



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old December 29th, 2009, 08:14 PM   #41
Toadboy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Liverpool, in the North of England but not of it
Posts: 10,758
Likes (Received): 957

Are any rail lines 'economic'?

Spot on though, the economy needs beefing up, I'll take a government ministry, I'll take shipping lines and a growing port, I'll take a cruise terminal, I'll take an extended runway at Speke and international flights, etc.

It's vital that this isn't another tool of London restricting governance, organic economic development, global trading of our cities etc. though.
__________________
Duh! Knows
Toadboy no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
 
Old December 29th, 2009, 08:30 PM   #42
Martin S
Sadly not Portsmouth.
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 7,703
Likes (Received): 618

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheFly View Post
This image intrigues me. It states WCML. Fair enough...but it spurs off to Manchester, twice before then...Wilmslow route and Stafford route.

So, Liverpool & Manchester have spurs now...so why not again for HSR?
Fly, That's just my interpretation of how the route will serve Liverpool actually by a spur off the line via Warrington rather than via Runcorn at present. I would expect Manchester to be served by a similar spur.

The difference though is that the WCML at present goes through Warrington with a station at Bank Quay. As I would expect a HS route to by-pass Warrington, I expect that the best way to serve this important market would be by making it a stop on the Liverpool spur.

You could, of course, have one spur each to serve Liverpool and Warrington but that would split the market and lead to a reduction in frequency as well as being more costly.
__________________
Martin S no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 29th, 2009, 08:48 PM   #43
Martin S
Sadly not Portsmouth.
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 7,703
Likes (Received): 618

Whichever government wins the next election, we are going to see cutbacks in public expenditure - that's because the whole country is up to its eyeballs in debt.

I'm not sure that the return of a Conservative government would necessarily mean any more cutbacks than Labour - simply because, when it comes to the nuts and bolts of public transport investment they have a better record than Labour even though they lean more to a private transport ideology.

As for the problem with the rail link going through the Chilterns, I think it is a case of the costs going to one group of people and the benefits to another. The M40 motorway cut through the Chilterns in the 1980s but directly benefited the local economy and so probably didn't get the opposition that HS2 would.

As with HS1 through Kent, the solution will probably be a lot of tunnels and cuttings to reduce noise and visual impact and even a four track railway has much less land take than a standard motorway.
__________________
Martin S no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 29th, 2009, 10:17 PM   #44
HollyBlack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,310
Likes (Received): 47

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheFly View Post
This image intrigues me. It states WCML. Fair enough...but it spurs off to Manchester, twice before then...Wilmslow route and Stafford route. So, Liverpool & Manchester have spurs now...so why not again for HSR?
If it is to be different for HSR contrasted with WCML, it is because of a need for spurs from the backbone not only from the South but also from the North.

That is provision of HS Scotland-Manchester and Scotland-Liverpool routes. I see Chat Moss as better than the Southern route via Warrington for lines to/from Scotland (more cheap land is available to build some very long and fast chords).
The London-Manchester line can best come off the HSR near Wilmslow.

Another good possibility is to build a tally new true HS line from Liverpool Airport to Manchester airport (presumably following the ship canal right of way).

Let's hope the Heathrow PRT is a success so it can be copied for JLA/LSP.
HollyBlack no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 29th, 2009, 10:58 PM   #45
TheFly
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Manchester
Posts: 6,279
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by HollyBlack View Post
If it is to be different for HSR contrasted with WCML, it is because of a need for spurs from the backbone not only from the South but also from the North.

That is provision of HS Scotland-Manchester and Scotland-Liverpool routes. I see Chat Moss as better than the Southern route via Warrington for lines to/from Scotland (more cheap land is available to build some very long and fast chords).
The London-Manchester line can best come off the HSR near Wilmslow.

Another good possibility is to build a tally new true HS line from Liverpool Airport to Manchester airport (presumably following the ship canal right of way).

Let's hope the Heathrow PRT is a success so it can be copied for JLA/LSP.
What price short term, PFI fiddled `cheapness'.

HSR is a massive 100 year investment. Essentially it should be future proofed and have almost nothing to do with short-term gain.

So, IF, Liverpool is not currently economic, ensure that in say 20 years (don't have a go), Liverpool-Manchester-Leeds is a HIGHLY likely new line and it slots into the existing infrastructure (say double decked terminal/flyover in Manchester already in place for the east/west line). Similar for the, at the moment uneconomic Manc-Glasgow/Liverpoo/Glasgow northern spur?

Die laughing if this is in the plan! FFS they have not sorted out London air transport after 50 years of fannying about....oh look, they sold the airports off and BAA gives MP free Heathrow passes so no MP votes for a new airport and they extend Heathrow to be now only half the runways of Amsterdam today!
TheFly no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 30th, 2009, 12:30 AM   #46
Splendidineogh
Ffestiniog
 
Splendidineogh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 809
Likes (Received): 0

Fly,

I'm sure a bluebottle such as yourself has some really interesting dog poo to go and land on somewhere on the streets of Manchester.

The people of Liverpool are entitled to feel anxious about this matter. It is very important. Your contributions are adding nothing except mischief.

In any case, I doubt very much that HSR2 is even going to happen. I do think that Liverpool people should be contacting their MPs and councillors right now, especially Louise Ellman who has been closely involved in the planning of HSR2.

But that said, I would be suprised if it happens. This country is horrendously in debt. No government that is being run by sane individuals will spend billions on this whilst the country is trillions of pounds in debt. The next government will be too preoccupied with shoring up our debt crisis and preventing a run on sterling. That's how serious things are. It is now a case of preventing a plunge in international confidence.

This is a rail enthusiast's dream. After all in such a small country, where it only take 2 hours to travel from northern cities to London, is it worth spending billions on this when there are more important things, like interest rates and sterling, to think about?

But do contact your MPs just in case.
Splendidineogh no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 30th, 2009, 12:36 AM   #47
wiggleyleeds
wiggledypiggleypuddinghed
 
wiggleyleeds's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Leeds
Posts: 11,200
Likes (Received): 207



the trouble is, without a line it's not gonna become more economically active is it - , its a vicious circle. liverpool heavily underperforms relative to its size etc, and so if anything, it is places like liverpool that a HSR link would give greater economical growth, compared to places like leeds or manchester.

Its the same crappy arguments for london. its like err lets spend a shocking 10 billion on cross rail to gain an extra 20 mins travel across london, because london is so important. The reason london has such a disproportionate critical mass of business and growth is precisely because so much infrastructure investment gets ploughed into it. So their answer to this? Plough even more money into it. Its stupid and short sighted. Theyve just diverted huge housing infrastructure funds from the north east to greater london and the south east because there is more demand and shortage of housing there. Yes this is true but only because it has been engineered to be that way so. All the government would have to do is relocate 60% of government jobs to the regions, save shit loads of cash by doing this, whilst creating a need for people to be in other cities in the UK not just london. Such relocations would start up tertiary employment in all sectors, and dampen demand of housing in london. Apologies for going of an a tangent
wiggleyleeds no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 30th, 2009, 12:47 AM   #48
Dreamer
Let the Jam decide
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: LIVERPOOL!
Posts: 1,521
Likes (Received): 67

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyLeigh View Post
Network Rail put it quite simply;
A HS2 line which has a Warrington branch linking to Liverpool is the economically justifiable line, going straight to manchester is not.

If Liverpool is omitted from this then you have your smoking gun, that the government is irrationally working to isolate/destroy the city.

To be honest though Liverpool makes life hard for itself, if the city wasn't balkanised - why is a huge chunk of north liverpool in Sefton? why does knowsley even exist? - its population figure, in the statistics the government clings to, would reflect reality and the city would be impossible to ignore.
I agree with the Sefton comment, its a complete joke to think Bootle is not part of the LCC area, the same for Broadgreen, Hale/Halewood, Kirkby etc etc
__________________
Liber8
Dreamer no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 30th, 2009, 01:41 AM   #49
Scarecrow
Sir Digby Chicken Caesar
 
Scarecrow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Outside Society
Posts: 8,689
Likes (Received): 998

I'm not a Liverpudlian. I'm A SEFTONIAN!!

Must be. I travel from Bootle to Southport every day. ...

__________________
COUNTY ROAD TAKE ME HOME TO THE PLACE I BELONG
Scarecrow está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old December 30th, 2009, 03:42 AM   #50
Cherguevara
Registered User
 
Cherguevara's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 7,364
Likes (Received): 818

Quote:
Originally Posted by wiggleyleeds View Post


the trouble is, without a line it's not gonna become more economically active is it - , its a vicious circle. liverpool heavily underperforms relative to its size etc, and so if anything, it is places like liverpool that a HSR link would give greater economical growth, compared to places like leeds or manchester.

Its the same crappy arguments for london. its like err lets spend a shocking 10 billion on cross rail to gain an extra 20 mins travel across london, because london is so important. The reason london has such a disproportionate critical mass of business and growth is precisely because so much infrastructure investment gets ploughed into it. So their answer to this? Plough even more money into it. Its stupid and short sighted. Theyve just diverted huge housing infrastructure funds from the north east to greater london and the south east because there is more demand and shortage of housing there. Yes this is true but only because it has been engineered to be that way so. All the government would have to do is relocate 60% of government jobs to the regions, save shit loads of cash by doing this, whilst creating a need for people to be in other cities in the UK not just london. Such relocations would start up tertiary employment in all sectors, and dampen demand of housing in london. Apologies for going of an a tangent
It's the nature of national (and regional) decision making though to concentrate resources where they will have most effect in terms of encouraging growth, raising revenues and allowing tax rates to be kept low. It's not a particularly fair way of doing things, but it's a function of policy being driven by a very narrow band of voters who don't live in the north and don't live in cities.

Obviously the fairest thing for regional spending is to repatriate all of it (or most of it) to the natural economic regions and let them make their own choices (whether the people are willing to vest this power in these rather abstract entities is however open to question). But with national schemes like high speed rail the taxpayer (many if not most of whom will never directly benefit from the scheme) will want assurances that the scheme proposed is offering value for money. A local MP may lobby a minister, but the Treasury will always be able to trump any local concern by saying that they're acting in the national interest.

It's the constitution that's at fault.
Cherguevara está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old December 30th, 2009, 03:39 PM   #51
guenuk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Liverpool
Posts: 886
Likes (Received): 2

Anything that involves the Govt will follow the govt agenda and we all know their agenda in the North West of England has been Manchester-centric I expect to be seriously worried when the plans are revealed in March.
guenuk no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 30th, 2009, 07:44 PM   #52
TommyMogan
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 423
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cherguevara View Post
It's the nature of national (and regional) decision making though to concentrate resources where they will have most effect in terms of encouraging growth, raising revenues and allowing tax rates to be kept low.
I thought it was to get votes. Some desicions are clearly political rather than logical.
TommyMogan no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 30th, 2009, 08:06 PM   #53
Cherguevara
Registered User
 
Cherguevara's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 7,364
Likes (Received): 818

Quote:
Originally Posted by TommyMogan View Post
I thought it was to get votes. Some desicions are clearly political rather than logical.
Yes. The votes of swing voters. Who a largely affluent southern England living suburbanites who don't value things like public transport for the north because they will never use it. No one in Luton cares whether Liverpool, Manchester, both or neither are regenerated. What they do care about is schools, hospitals, jobs, crime and paying low taxes.
Cherguevara está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old April 12th, 2010, 08:07 PM   #54
JohnnyLeigh
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 590
Likes (Received): 10

Labour Manifesto released today:

"Built in stages, the initial line will link London to Birmingham, Manchester, the East Midlands, Sheffield and Leeds, and then to the North and Scotland"
"By running through-trains from day one, cities including Glasgow, Edinburgh, Newcastle and Liverpool will also be part of the initial network."

No line for Liverpool.
It seems the line is to go the much more expensive route of through Manchester than through the middle of both cities and connect that way.
I bet Liverpool will still dutifully return 5 Labour MPs.
JohnnyLeigh está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old April 12th, 2010, 08:12 PM   #55
JohnnyLeigh
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 590
Likes (Received): 10

Also in the Liverpool manifesto is a committment to support trams upgrades in the 'major cities'
Manchester, Nottingham, Birmingham, Leeds and Tyne & Wear.

No mention of Liverpool.
JohnnyLeigh está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old April 12th, 2010, 08:13 PM   #56
TommyMogan
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 423
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyLeigh View Post
Labour Manifesto released today:

"Built in stages, the initial line will link London to Birmingham, Manchester, the East Midlands, Sheffield and Leeds, and then to the North and Scotland"
"By running through-trains from day one, cities including Glasgow, Edinburgh, Newcastle and Liverpool will also be part of the initial network."

No line for Liverpool.
It seems the line is to go the much more expensive route of through Manchester than through the middle of both cities and connect that way.
I bet Liverpool will still dutifully return 5 Labour MPs.
The route has not been finalized. Liverpool will use the WCML spur or via the 1830 Liverpool-Manchester line when peeling off the HSR2.

Liverpool does not have a tram system to upgrade. The DfT wants Liverpool to extend its existing metro. Which is better than trams.

I hope Liverpool return 5 Labour MPs.
TommyMogan no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 12th, 2010, 08:15 PM   #57
Gareth
Keltlandia
 
Gareth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Liverpool
Posts: 8,926
Likes (Received): 61

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyLeigh View Post
Also in the Liverpool manifesto is a committment to support trams upgrades in the 'major cities'
Manchester, Nottingham, Birmingham, Leeds and Tyne & Wear.

No mention of Liverpool.
Aka North West, East Midlands, West Midlands, Yorkshire & Humber, North East.
Gareth no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 13th, 2010, 12:52 AM   #58
eyeam
Registered User
 
eyeam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Liverpool
Posts: 1,241
Likes (Received): 36

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyLeigh View Post
Also in the Liverpool manifesto is a committment to support trams upgrades in the 'major cities'
Manchester, Nottingham, Birmingham, Leeds and Tyne & Wear.

No mention of Liverpool.
Yet Gordon Brown has the cheek to come to Ellesmere Port to launch the ******* thing.

After the way they've treated our city since coming into office there's absolutely no way I would ever vote for them again.
eyeam no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 13th, 2010, 01:45 AM   #59
TommyMogan
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 423
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by eyeam View Post
Yet Gordon Brown has the cheek to come to Ellesmere Port to launch the ******* thing.

After the way they've treated our city since coming into office there's absolutely no way I would ever vote for them again.
You must have amnesia. The city was a basket case before Blair/Brown came to power.
TommyMogan no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 13th, 2010, 01:48 AM   #60
TommyMogan
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 423
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by Toadboy View Post
Are any rail lines 'economic'?
Yes. They create economic growth, so are economical -maybe not in ticket sales though. Overall, yes.
TommyMogan no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
high speed rail, hs2, rail, railways, transport

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT +2. The time now is 07:57 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like v3.2.5 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu