Merseyrail Expansion

[Xenophon PCDGS]

The principle of "build it and they will come" is generally pretty solid where there is potential custom.

But in the case of Rainford, Upholland, Orrell and Pemberton, it has already been built by the Liverpool and Bury Railway and been in existence for a great many years. I cannot speak for Rainford as it is not an area well known to me, but can for the other three stations. Upholland was a long walk away from the town it purports to serve the last time I visited that town as was the case when railway companies in the early Victorian period were more concerned with shortest distances for goods traffic. Upholland is in its second location, the original one being viewed as "being problematical" by the railway company. Both the other two stations of Orrell and Pemberton have bus services that well serve the local populations for both local area bus journeys and for services into Wigan bus station. Both those areas were in the tranche 1 section of the Bee Network bus transportation system of Greater Manchester that is the vision of the Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham.

 

[Blackpool boy]

I think you need to understand the vision of Mayor Andy Burnham of "Bee Network" eventually being an all-encompassing mixture of buses, trams and trains.

yes but that is only for about 8 lines within greater Manchester and does not exclude services crossing the boundary lines or are you expecting TEP, Avanti and EMR and Northern from never setting foot into Manchester ever again?

 

[Bletchleyite]

But in the case of Rainford, Upholland, Orrell and Pemberton, it has already been built by the Liverpool and Bury Railway and been in existence for a great many years.

I hardly think one 40 year old DMU per hour and no evening service in any way compares in appeal to two or even four brand-new EMUs per hour with service until 23something from Liverpool. About all they have in common is two bits of metal two horses' backsides apart.

Plus it could be in part funded by significant housebuilding in Rainford and maybe to the south of Upholland (where Skelmersdale should have been built to start with - straddling the line not north of it).

 

[Blackpool boy]

I hardly think one 40 year old DMU per hour and no evening service in any way compares in appeal to two or even four brand-new EMUs per hour with service until 23something from Liverpool. About all they have in common is two bits of metal two horses' backsides apart.

Exactly this - a better service should increase patronage and quite possibly unlock some housebuilding too

 

[Bletchleyite]

Exactly this - a better service should increase patronage and quite possibly unlock some housebuilding too

Filling in the gap between Rainford and Rainford Junction with housing seems a very obvious quick win that would get you 1000 homes or so, and would make people more likely to access the station from the present Rainford on foot/by bicycle.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Despite all the arguments that have been put forward, the fact is that the aspirational train service is one that will be a Merseyrail service.

So will someone put in print on this thread the exact actions that have been taken by Merseyrail to extend the current service to Wigan Wallgate station. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[frodshamfella]

Tend to agree. The Northern service is infrequent and unreliable, perfect recipe to put people off using it. I've friends in Rainford, they never use their station as they deem it pretty poor.

There were plans to build a branch to Skelmersdale. The logical thing is for Merseyrail to do that and to the bit to Wigan.

 

[Bletchleyite]

There were plans to build a branch to Skelmersdale. The logical thing is for Merseyrail to do that and to the bit to Wigan.

Given the nature of Skelmersdale (and the cleaner 4tph service that would result rather than a split 2 and 2) I think my inclination is that the "Skelmersdale Parkway" option is preferable, i.e. expanding Upholland on a site on the Pimbo side coupled with improved local bus services. The Glenburn site offers few benefits over doing that and has downsides such as cost. It isn't central enough to really be a central station, so most people would reach it by car/taxi. Coupled with that should be ecotown style housing development around Rainford (roughly double it in size) and Upholland (to the south centred on the station).

 

[Blackpool boy]

Despite all the arguments that have been put forward, the fact is that the aspirational train service is one that will be a Merseyrail service.

So will someone put in print on this thread the exact actions that have been taken by Merseyrail to extend the current service to Wigan Wallgate station. Nothing more, nothing less.

You do understand that this thread is about MerseyRail - no one else - and that it is in the 'speculative' section of this forum.

 

[daodao]

You do understand that this thread is about MerseyRail - no one else - and that it is in the 'speculative' section of this forum.

@Xenophon PCDGS is quite right to highlight that the putative Merseyrail extension to Wigan Wallgate would largely be running within Greater Manchester, so the attitude/views of the Greater Manchester mayor (currently Andy Burnham) and TfGM would be crucial in agreeing whether or not it could be implemented. Given their approach to cross-boundary bus services, I suspect that they would not be comfortable with a local rail service into Greater Manchester being under the control of another major metropolitan area. Their approach has already led to a severing of the direct bus service (currently numbered X5) run by Warrington Transport at Lymm when tranche 3 of the TfGM bus franchising scheme goes live in January 2025.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Their approach has already led to a severing of the direct bus service (currently numbered X5) run by Warrington Transport at Lymm when tranche 3 of the TfGM bus franchising scheme goes live in January 2025.

Is there documentation as to the reasoning for this, e.g. does it relate to Warrington's Own Buses not wanting to provide this to TfGM specifications/fares?

I struggle to see why TfGM would oppose a significant upgrade to one of their rail services fully funded by someone else, though. It's like suggesting Lancashire are standing at Maghull North waving pitchforks at the fact that Town Green, Aughton Park and Ormskirk enjoy a superb rail service paid for largely by the Liverpool City Region taxpayer and have for years.

There are reasons not to do this such as cost of course. But if TfGM really do object to a big upgrade paid for by someone else then frankly they're fools. I suspect they in fact would not object any more than they would object to DfT funded TOCs operating within GM e.g. Avanti West Coast, CrossCountry etc.

 

[Blackpool boy]

@Xenophon PCDGS is quite right to highlight that the putative Merseyrail extension to Wigan Wallgate would largely be running within Greater Manchester, so the attitude/views of the Greater Manchester mayor (currently Andy Burnham) and TfGM would be crucial in agreeing whether or not it could be implemented. Given their approach to cross-boundary bus services, I suspect that they would not be comfortable with a local rail service into Greater Manchester being under the control of another major metropolitan area. Their approach has already led to a severing of the direct bus service (currently numbered X5) run by Warrington Transport at Lymm when tranche 3 of the TfGM bus franchising scheme goes live in January 2025.

Rubbish - the only people who would be concerned with a train service going into another destination would be the powers that be of the railway and not some willy waving contest by the mayor of Manchester who doesnt really have much say in it.

I mean they already have services between liverpool and manchester do they not?

 

[daodao]

Is there documentation as to the reasoning for this, e.g. does it relate to Warrington's Own Buses not wanting to provide this to TfGM specifications/fares?

I struggle to see why TfGM would oppose a significant upgrade to one of their rail services fully funded by someone else, though.

Please see my post in another Rail Forums thread entitled "Bee Network Service/Route Discussion" about TfGM buses at https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/bee-network-service-route-discussion.262963/post-7002110

It is likely that Merseytravel and the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority would not be allowed to fund those aspects of the development that would be beyond the Liverpool City Region boundary in Lancashire and Greater Manchester.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I struggle to see why TfGM would oppose a significant upgrade to one of their rail services fully funded by someone else, though.

Can you be so kind as to provide a link to the information in which Merseyrail set out their financial costings and time and date projections for the line extension from Headbolt Lane to Wigan Wallgate.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Can you be so kind as to provide a link to the information in which Merseyrail set out their financial costings and time and date projections for the line extension from Headbolt Lane to Wigan Wallgate.

No such document has, to my awareness, been published. Remember that this thread is in the Speculative section of the Forum.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

You do understand that this thread is about MerseyRail - no one else - and that it is in the 'speculative' section of this forum.

Of course I do. That is of course if you are willing to accept the fact that these speculations blithely run to areas controlled by a different but very large metropolitan mayoral area. It would appear to be that no concern or thought has been considered by "the speculators".

MOTTO FOR THE DAY .... Do not ask for realism on a speculation thread, as a refusal often offends.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Of course I do. That is of course if you are willing to accept the fact that these speculations blithely run to areas controlled by a different but very large metropolitan mayoral area. It would appear to be that no concern or thought has been considered by "the speculators".

It certainly has been considered. The line is somewhat of a nuisance to TfGM and would get in the way of, for example, converting Atherton to Metrolink*. If Merseytravel came along and said "we'll do it" I would be astonished if they looked a gift horse in the mouth.

* Metrolink to Headbolt Lane *really would* be fanciful. The chance that that is being considered is basically zero.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

No such document has, to my awareness, been published. Remember that this thread is in the Speculative section of the Forum.

A pity really, as I was envisaging the large housebuilding projects that have been mention in the Rainford area, which correct me if I am wrong comes under the St Helens area authority.

The new Labour government has spoken of large social housing projects as part of their plans and it made me wonder if the housing in the Rainford area was private housing or social housing. There would need to be schools, GP practices, etc, to meet the needs of the new residents who would be moving there.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The new Labour government has spoken of large social housing projects as part of their plans and it made me wonder if the housing in the Rainford area was private housing or social housing.

Yes, it comes under St Helens (and thus Liverpool City Region).

Housing looks to be a mix of traditional terraces/cottages, 1930s/40s semis and detached, 1970s Barratt type housing (almost certainly all owned) and 1960s type housing that looks like at one point it was Council housing though I doubt most of it remains as such. A very similar mix of housing to much of Bletchley!

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

It certainly has been considered. The line is somewhat of a nuisance to TfGM and would get in the way of, for example, converting Atherton to Metrolink*. If Merseytravel came along and said "we'll do it" I would be astonished if they looked a gift horse in the mouth.

* Metrolink to Headbolt Lane *really would* be fanciful. The chance that that is being considered is basically zero.

Has it crossed the mind of anyone that Wigan Wallgate also has rail services to the Southport area, so when talk concerns three or four Headbolt Lane services per hour arriving at Wigan Wallgate station, how will this affect the service patterns of the services to and from Southport.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Has it crossed the mind of anyone that Wigan Wallgate also has rail services to the Southport area, so when talk concerns three or four Headbolt Lane services per hour arriving at Wigan Wallgate station, how will this affect the service patterns of the services to and from Southport.

I think a three platform station (2 through, one bay) is going to be able to cope perfectly well with 6tphpd, there are plenty such stations that have more than that such as Sandhills which has 12tphpd at two platforms.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Yes, it comes under St Helens (and thus Liverpool City Region).

Housing looks to be a mix of traditional terraces/cottages, 1930s/40s semis and detached, 1970s Barratt type housing (almost certainly all owned) and 1960s type housing that looks like at one point it was Council housing though I doubt most of it remains as such. A very similar mix of housing to much of Bletchley!

Thanks for this information. I was wondering what type of housing of quite some envisaged size that some posters feel could be built in the Rainford area which is stated to be a method of financing an improved rail service.

A matter has been put to me that concerns the ENCTS passes issued by TfGM that holders of these can pay an annual £10,00 surcharge which will then extend the bus usage to include both rail and tram travel inside the borders of Greater Manchester. Would the holders of such extended ENCTS passes in the Pemberton and the Orrell areas of Greater Manchester still be allowed the existing travel from the railway stations in those two area, respective of who runs the rail service.

I think a three platform station (2 through, one bay) is going to be able to cope perfectly well with 6tphpd, there are plenty such stations that have more than that such as Sandhills which has 12tphpd at two platforms.

With regards to the bay platform, has that new building on the station platform area taken any length off the existing bay platform?

 

[Bletchleyite]

A matter has been put to me that concerns the ENCTS passes issued by TfGM that holders of these can pay an annual £10,00 surcharge which will then extend the bus usage to include both rail and tram travel inside the borders of Greater Manchester. Would the holders of such extended ENCTS passes in the Pemberton and the Orrell areas of Greater Manchester still be allowed the existing travel from the railway stations in those two area, respective of who runs the rail service.

Are those passes valid on Avanti West Coast between Stockport and Manchester? If so, and I believe they are, there is no reason to suppose this would be any different, provided Merseyrail remains as a TOC rather than going fully independent.

With regards to the bay platform, has that new building on the station platform area taken any length off the existing bay platform?

It has, yes, but it could always be demolished or the platforms otherwise altered.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

It has, yes, but it could always be demolished or the platforms otherwise altered.

The Manchester-bound platform line is hard against the steep vertical wall that is adjacent to King Street West, so there is no option for alteration on that side.

On the Southport bound platform line, after leaving the "tunnel" under Wallgate, would track relaying and new platform face construction be a feasible possibility as there is not much distance between the existing end to the platforms and where the line goes under the West Coast Main Line

 

[pokemonsuper9]

With regards to the bay platform, has that new building on the station platform area taken any length off the existing bay platform?

Platform 3 is no shorter, an area previously of grass and plants has been removed, the only thing lost is potential expansion.

I could imagine that a train could use the existing platform towards Southport to arrive and turn around in, especially in the gap between xx:12 and xx:40 (although the freight trains may not help with that), you could definitely fit an 8 car 777 in there

 

[Bletchleyite]

The Manchester-bound platform line is hard against the steep vertical wall that is adjacent to King Street West, so there is no option for alteration on that side.

On the Southport bound platform line, after leaving the "tunnel" under Wallgate, would track relaying and new platform face construction be a feasible possibility as there is not much distance between the existing end to the platforms and where the line goes under the West Coast Main Line

If willing to remove some of the car parking, there would seem to be plenty of room for an additional platform for trains towards Southport. It might not be long enough for 8.777 but would be for a 4-car set of anything Northern run up there. The present Southport bound platform could then become a bay with a walkway to the new platform.

In short, there are feasible options to do this. The thing that might stop them doing it is simply cost vs. benefit.

 

[Blackpool boy]

Of course I do. That is of course if you are willing to accept the fact that these speculations blithely run to areas controlled by a different but very large metropolitan mayoral area. It would appear to be that no concern or thought has been considered by "the speculators".

MOTTO FOR THE DAY .... Do not ask for realism on a speculation thread, as a refusal often offends.

As far as im aware no mayor has any say in track access applications to Network Rail or whoever deals with them

I think this may be something you have invented as i dont remember Sadiq Khan flatly refusing open access services into the area he is mayor of

Thanks for this information. I was wondering what type of housing of quite some envisaged size that some posters feel could be built in the Rainford area which is stated to be a method of financing an improved rail service.

Who said it house building would being used to finance teh extension - i said that if they did create such a journey then it could unlock housebuilding along the line

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Im unsure why you think Merseyrail would need permission from GMPTE to run trains into Wigan?

I agree with that statement as GMPTE have not as such been in existence for a considerable period of time.....

There were plans to build a branch to Skelmersdale. The logical thing is for Merseyrail to do that and to the bit to Wigan.

Who was it who officially put the nail into that particular Skelmersdale coffin? What did Merseyrail do in the run up to that decision being taken?

 

[Blackpool boy]

I agree with that statement as GMPTE have not as such been in existence for a considerable period of time.....

Doesnt really matter, you knew what i was on about.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Who said it house building would being used to finance teh extension.

Can I refer you to the final part of posting #753 on this thread, made by a third party.