Merseyrail Expansion

[Bletchleyite]

Are many of them maybe using Hunts Cross to get a bus to and from the airport? Would diverting the Northern Line away from Hunts Cross to a new station at the airport not be an improvement (although presumably not for the good people of Hunts Cross).

I could see sense in half the Northern Line services going to Gateacre via Hunts X and half of them going to the airport. If they all went to the airport, there would need to be a significant improvement to the CLC local service which would involve removing the fast services.

However my preferred option would probably be a 2 or 4tph Lime St-Airport EMU service calling at Edge Hill, Mossley Hill, West Allerton and South Parkway (allowing the former 3 to be removed from other services) using the barely-used slow lines. This is physically easier to do because of the layout of the lines than sending Merseyrail to the airport.

 

[CaramellDansen]

However my preferred option would probably be a 2 or 4tph Lime St-Airport EMU service calling at Edge Hill, Mossley Hill, West Allerton and South Parkway (allowing the former 3 to be removed from other services) using the barely-used slow lines. This is physically easier to do because of the layout of the lines than sending Merseyrail to the airport.

I'm in complete agreement, with the addition of the three previously-closed Sefton Park and Wavertree and Speke stations, as well as a station south of Halewood to capture the new housing developments?
However, using the line into Lime Street has been shown to be less preferable than a line to Central via Wapping tunnel, and adding new platforms to the already-crowded Central, as shown by the attached Merseytravel document.

(The file has been split into two parts, since it was too big.)

Part 2

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'm in complete agreement, with the addition of the three previously-closed Sefton Park and Wavertree and Speke stations, as well as a station south of Halewood to capture the new housing developments?
However, using the line into Lime Street has been shown to be less preferable than a line to Central via Wapping tunnel, and adding new platforms to the already-crowded Central, as shown by the attached Merseytravel document.

(The file has been split into two parts, since it was too big.)

Part 2

If Wapping was to be done, I'd suggest that became a 4tph Ormskirk to Airport service, potentially with 2tph eventually extending back to Burscough Bridge via the South Curve or even Preston. Ormskirk makes more sense than Headbolt as it'd make more sense to use 25kV for a Preston extension than batteries (both because the line is longer and because it'd probably be possible just to spur wiring Ormskirk off the WCML due to it being quite short* and with a low power requirement), and a given 777 can only have one or the other fitted.

Wapping isn't however essential for it, and I'd very much see an Airport extension of Lime St services and Wapping as entirely separate projects each having their own benefits. An Airport spur would be cheaper and easier (no need for any tunnelling for one, there are roads you could close to run it down instead) so I'd probably do that first, Wapping might be years.

Ironically opening Wapping could mean you'd get away with Central remaining as two platforms as you'd be able to remove 8tph that reverse and block one as they do (4 could go to the airport and the other 4 to Wigan/St Helens - you'd probably want to stick with Lime St for the Chat Moss route to avoid importing delays too much, and if you wanted to do Warrington extending the Hunts X service would be better). However you would need to widen them. I'd suggest side platforms with the same sort of layout as St Pancras Low Level as you wouldn't have to do much digging out to get that and you could make use of the presently unused corners of the station box.

* This may sound like a contradiction, but it's not - the line is quite long for battery operation but quite short for a 25kV spur.

 

[CaramellDansen]

If Wapping was to be done, I'd suggest that became a 4tph Ormskirk to Airport service, potentially with 2tph eventually extending back to Burscough Bridge via the South Curve or even Preston. Ormskirk makes more sense than Headbolt as it'd make more sense to use 25kV for a Preston extension than batteries (both because the line is longer and because it'd probably be possible just to spur wiring Ormskirk off the WCML due to it being quite short* and with a low power requirement), and a given 777 can only have one or the other fitted.

Wapping isn't however essential for it, and I'd very much see an Airport extension of Lime St services and Wapping as entirely separate projects each having their own benefits. An Airport spur would be cheaper and easier (no need for any tunnelling for one, there are roads you could close to run it down instead) so I'd probably do that first, Wapping might be years.

Ironically opening Wapping could mean you'd get away with Central remaining as two platforms as you'd be able to remove 8tph that reverse and block one as they do (4 could go to the airport and the other 4 to Wigan/St Helens - you'd probably want to stick with Lime St for the Chat Moss route to avoid importing delays too much, and if you wanted to do Warrington extending the Hunts X service would be better). However you would need to widen them. I'd suggest side platforms with the same sort of layout as St Pancras Low Level as you wouldn't have to do much digging out to get that and you could make use of the presently unused corners of the station box.

* This may sound like a contradiction, but it's not - the line is quite long for battery operation but quite short for a 25kV spur.

I'm in full agreement with the OLE. It's frankly comical that Merseyrail is avoiding OLE like the plague, despite their new units being compatible and with pretty much every metro in the world using OLE instead of third rail now. Merseyrail need a kick up the arse to finally start converting over, if not on their extensions, then everywhere! Batteries are being sold to us as this advancement, freeing us from 3rd rail, but it's frankly just kicking the can down the road, replacing one limitation with another! Plus, I can't wait to see the havoc a battery train failing or running out will do, especially on some of the single-track sections!

If Wapping isn't chosen, a widening of the Lime Street cutting/tunnel would absolutely be necessary.

I wonder if the line past the airport branch (Ditton Junction and further) would be a viable route into Warrington...?

 

[Elecman]

If Wapping was to be done, I'd suggest that became a 4tph Ormskirk to Airport service, potentially with 2tph eventually extending back to Burscough Bridge via the South Curve or even Preston. Ormskirk makes more sense than Headbolt as it'd make more sense to use 25kV for a Preston extension than batteries (both because the line is longer and because it'd probably be possible just to spur wiring Ormskirk off the WCML due to it being quite short* and with a low power requirement), and a given 777 can only have one or the other fitted.

Wapping isn't however essential for it, and I'd very much see an Airport extension of Lime St services and Wapping as entirely separate projects each having their own benefits. An Airport spur would be cheaper and easier (no need for any tunnelling for one, there are roads you could close to run it down instead) so I'd probably do that first, Wapping might be years.

Ironically opening Wapping could mean you'd get away with Central remaining as two platforms as you'd be able to remove 8tph that reverse and block one as they do (4 could go to the airport and the other 4 to Wigan/St Helens - you'd probably want to stick with Lime St for the Chat Moss route to avoid importing delays too much, and if you wanted to do Warrington extending the Hunts X service would be better). However you would need to widen them. I'd suggest side platforms with the same sort of layout as St Pancras Low Level as you wouldn't have to do much digging out to get that and you could make use of the presently unused corners of the station box.

* This may sound like a contradiction, but it's not - the line is quite long for battery operation but quite short for a 25kV spur.

And even easier to feed when the proposed new Penwortham 400kV Grid Feeder is completed

 

[urbophile]

If Wapping isn't chosen, a widening of the Lime Street cutting/tunnel would absolutely be necessary.

Which presumably would be much more expensive.

 

[Mr. SW]

During various on-off crayoning episodes involving the Wapping tunnel, I came across the report attached above, and whilst agree with certain aspects, other things I would take a longer look at. There are problems with the width narrowness of 22ft (6,706mm), the inclination steepness of 1 in 48 (2.08%) and the extreme proximity of historically significant structures at the eastern end, some of which are concealed underground. Even my own crude efforts have put the connecting tunnels from the existing headings at Central to a point by Blackburne Place have shown the gradient could be very steep, maybe 1 in 40 (2.5%). While using the tunnel could form part of a long-term solution Liverpool's transport problems, I would vouchsafe the following comments:

1: Nobody is going to be digging holes under Liverpool without sufficient cause to do so.
2: If you are going to dig holes, they must be of sufficient size and quality as to long-term usage, maintenance and upgradeablity.

But all is not lost.

So 'Yes' to:
Resignalling of the Inner Loop and Link Lines to allow closer headways, in the manner of the London Underground.
Expansion of Central Station to three or maybe even four platforms.
Proposed Station (Northern Line) to the north of Chadwick Street called Liverpool Waters or Vauxhall. This is to break up the long section south of Sandhills and serve an up-coming residential area.
Proposed Station (City Line) south of Wellington Road called Wavertree.
Proposed Station (City Line) south of Smithdown Road called Smithdown Road.
Proposed Station (City Line) east of Woodend Avenue called Speke for John Lennon Airport. To serve as a terminus pending possible extension to South Widnes etc. A bus shuttle to the airport.
Splitting of the lines in Birkenhead: West Kirby and New Brighton services retaining the name Wirral Line, the services south to Chester and Ellesmere Port taking the name 'Sunlight Line', from Port Sunlight.
The extension of the Borderlands Line through the Liverpool loop (rush hours).
The conversion of the following lines to OLE: Northern Line Sandhills and all lines to the north, Northern Line St Michaels and all lines to the south. Wirral Line Birkenhead North and all lines including the Borderlands Line, Wirral Line (Sunlight Line) Rock Ferry and all lines to the south. This will leave a third rail core, which, should battery power develop to such a stage, could be removed entirely.
Track and infrastructure alterations to be made to enhance reliability and remove conflicting moves.
Bus route review and reform.

Also 'Hmm, Maybe' to:
Edge Hill Station Expansion
Proposed line from Hunts Cross, Broad Green, Aintree.
Proposed line from Bootle to Aintree (North Mersey Line).
Proposed service over existing line from Edge Hill to Kirkdale and/or Bootle.
Expansion of Lime Street Station including an extra tunnel from Edge Hill.
Trams.

An 'Ah, Perhaps?' to
Wapping Tunnel (No intermediate stations)
Victoria - Waterloo Tunnel with stations at Paddington/Grove Street and Byrom Street.
And a finally 'What are you on?' to
Any intermediate station on the Wapping Tunnel. (i in 48)
Revival of the Overhead Railway (I've seen too may videos of this). It's been replaced by the Northern Line. Live with it.
Random underground lines.
Excessive Curvature.
Excessive Gradients. (Liverpool is hilly)
Plus any other bonkers schemes.

 

[CaramellDansen]

Which presumably would be much more expensive.

It's Liverpool! Have you seen the importance of the routes and services that call at Lime St.? It's hardly a nowhere small town station. Something needs to be done about capacity through that bottleneck!
Not to mention: after decades of degeneration and planned decline, we frankly deserve it. If a big city in the South had this same issue, you just know that they'd get it.

Also 'Hmm, Maybe' to:
Proposed line from Hunts Cross, Broad Green, Aintree.

I think everything you said is fantastic, except the above: the Hunts Cross to Aintree line via Broadgreen would be really quite important, in my opinion. I might be biased since I live along it, but if Liverpool wants to start moving towards being a green city (the EU has us beat in cities a tenth our size) it could do with getting everyone into public transit; especially since the line goes through a lot of the eastern suburbs who have been left with no other options for decades (car or unreliable buses... most people are forced into their cars).
Not to mention, its value as a bike path is close to nil; most women I know won't even walk down it out of fear of crime, never mind that it doesn't really go anywhere on its own and could be replaced by parallel connections anyway (Remove some car lanes and institute bike lanes! Give them the Rails to Trails treatment, see how they like it!! )

 

[AlastairFraser]

I think everything you said is fantastic, except the above: the Hunts Cross to Aintree line via Broadgreen would be really quite important, in my opinion. I might be biased since I live along it, but if Liverpool wants to start moving towards being a green city (the EU has us beat in cities a tenth our size) it could do with getting everyone into public transit; especially since the line goes through a lot of the eastern suburbs who have been left with no other options for decades (car or unreliable buses... most people are forced into their cars).
Not to mention, its value as a bike path is close to nil; most women I know won't even walk down it out of fear of crime, never mind that it doesn't really go anywhere on its own and could be replaced by parallel connections anyway (Remove some car lanes and institute bike lanes! Give them the Rails to Trails treatment, see how they like it!!

Additionally, some of the alignment is wide enough for a path alongside too.

 

[Jack Hay]

I understand there is insufficient clearance in the Mersey Railway tunnel for overhead wiring. I doubt a 1:40 gradient is an obstacle to reopening Wapping tunnel, though, because both the Mersey tunnel and the climb from Moorfields to Sandhills are steeper than this.

 

[Bevan Price]

I'm in complete agreement, with the addition of the three previously-closed Sefton Park and Wavertree and Speke stations, as well as a station south of Halewood to capture the new housing developments?
However, using the line into Lime Street has been shown to be less preferable than a line to Central via Wapping tunnel, and adding new platforms to the already-crowded Central, as shown by the attached Merseytravel document.

(The file has been split into two parts, since it was too big.)

Part 2

Personally I consider that report to be seriously flawed. It totally ignores the value of connections between local rail services and long distance services at Liverpool Lime Street. In my opinion, connecting City Line services to Northern Line services would be of little value - just how much demand is there for through services. The only real value would be if they were planning through services to the Wirral, especially Chester - but that is not what they are proposing.

Sending City Line trains to Liverpool Central would mean that passengers for (e.g.) London or Birmingham would need to walk to Lime Street - often carrying luggage, or take the time-consuming diversion (via, and change at) Moorfields. Lime Street is also closer than Central to many of the city centre bus stops.

 

[Arkeeos]

Personally I consider that report to be seriously flawed. It totally ignores the value of connections between local rail services and long distance services at Liverpool Lime Street. In my opinion, connecting City Line services to Northern Line services would be of little value - just how much demand is there for through services. The only real value would be if they were planning through services to the Wirral, especially Chester - but that is not what they are proposing.

People can transfer at edge hill, so that's not really an issue.

 

[Mr. SW]

Sending City Line trains to Liverpool Central would mean that passengers for (e.g.) London or Birmingham would need to walk to Lime Street - often carrying luggage, or take the time-consuming diversion (via, and change at) Moorfields. Lime Street is also closer than Central to many of the city centre bus stops.

This is why Edge Hill Station needs to be developed as a full interchange in the form of a mini Clapham Junction or Stratford (London) with all mod cons.

I also have my doubts about through services from the East and/or South at Central and could not be better served by a change. I've even toyed with the idea of a quasi-restoration of the High Level. You can cram a couple of 200m long platforms if you really push it, but that would require new tunnels running through where the the old turntable stood on a more direct route to the Wapping Tunnel, joining it near Catherine Street. The gradient would be shallower too, I estimate about 1 in 70, but the tunnels will have to pass under the ruined church.

 

[urbophile]

I can never understand why the Link line didn't directly connect with Lime Street. It could have kept the same route and even the same Northern Line platforms at Central: all it needs is a simple pedestrian walkway and travelator connection which could have been easily done as part of the Clayton Square redevelopment. Maybe it is still possible. It's certainly no further than many connections between airport terminals, and I wonder if it is much further than connecting to Manchester Piccadilly 13 and 14 from the other end of the station. (If anyone here has tried to connect to Gare Montparnasse in Paris from the Metro they will know what I mean).

 

[Bevan Price]

People can transfer at edge hill, so that's not really an issue.

Bad idea. Do you trust connections ?
Instead of risking one train being late, you would now have to hope that both trains** were on time (or actually ran)
(** - City Line to Edge Hill, then Edge Hill to Lime Street)

An extra interchange for passengers also reduces the convenience of rail services.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I can never understand why the Link line didn't directly connect with Lime Street. It could have kept the same route and even the same Northern Line platforms at Central: all it needs is a simple pedestrian walkway and travelator connection which could have been easily done as part of the Clayton Square redevelopment. Maybe it is still possible. It's certainly no further than many connections between airport terminals, and I wonder if it is much further than connecting to Manchester Piccadilly 13 and 14 from the other end of the station. (If anyone here has tried to connect to Gare Montparnasse in Paris from the Metro they will know what I mean).

The walk is extremely easy at street level; the vast majority of interchanging passengers do this (anecdotally as a former local). That's probably nicer than walking through a subway that smells of wee. This sort of subway is so 1970s, the trend is to remove them (and the one between the station at Chester and the town can't be removed soon enough, it has to be said!)

It is I think roughly twice to three times as far as Piccadilly concourse to 13/14.

The walk takes about 6-7 minutes. Certainly my norm was leaving a train at Lime St arriving at xx00 and easily making, via the Central toilets, an Ormskirk train at xx10.

If you really don't want to walk (e.g. it's throwing down) you can always transfer via the Loop.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

If you really don't want to walk (e.g. it's throwing down) you can always transfer via the Loop.

While 'Central to Lime Street and vice versa' is one of this forum's hardy perennials, it's worth noting that Lime Street to Central (one stop on the Wirral Line) is considerably easier than Central to Lime Street (Northern to Moorfields: change: Wirral to Lime Street). I generally come down on the side of 'walk - it's neither far nor frightening' but if the threat is torrential rain then we do have a poor interchange in the Central to Lime Street direction.

 

[Bletchleyite]

While 'Central to Lime Street and vice versa' is one of this forum's hardy perennials, it's worth noting that Lime Street to Central (one stop on the Wirral Line) is considerably easier than Central to Lime Street (Northern to Moorfields: change: Wirral to Lime Street). I generally come down on the side of 'walk - it's neither far nor frightening' but if the threat is torrential rain then we do have a poor interchange in the Central to Lime Street direction.

You go to Moorfields one way and Central the other. All trains that serve Central also serve Moorfields, therefore nobody is disadvantaged by this - I don't doubt it was part of the reason the loop was designed as it was.

Nobody would do it by train who wasn't interchanging, Lime St is no less convenient for central Liverpool than Central.

 

[John Luxton]

I'm in complete agreement, with the addition of the three previously-closed Sefton Park and Wavertree and Speke stations, as well as a station south of Halewood to capture the new housing developments

I live within 5 minutes walk of the old Sefton Park Station. It closed a few months after I was born.

If you check it's entry on Disused Stations web site it is very clear that it never had a particularly good service. Post WWII services declined further.

The reason being there has always been an excellent tram and later bus service along this section of Smithdown Road.

Currently 86/86A/86C, 80 / 80A, 75, and 76 all serve the stop a few yards from the former station. All with the exception of the 80 / 80A stop by the Adelphi Hotel a few minutes walk from Central or Lime Street

The 80 route as also used to serve the Adelphi stop but was rerouted via Chinatown to reduce traffic congestion thus one has to alight at St Luke's and walk. The 76 approaches from London Road but again has a stop near Line Street.

Going the other way along Smithdown both 86A and 80A go to the airport with other journeys on the 80 / 86 calling at or starting from Liverpool South Parkway.

The bus service is so good that one doesn't really need to check the timetable except for very early or late buses. Just go to the stop and wait.

I don't think a reopened Sefton Park can compete and might well be a waste of money which could be better spent elsewhere.

 

[AlastairFraser]

I live within 5 minutes walk of the old Sefton Park Station. It closed a few months after I was born.

If you check it's entry on Disused Stations web site it is very clear that it never had a particularly good service. Post WWII services declined further.

The reason being there has always been an excellent tram and later bus service along this section of Smithdown Road.

Currently 86/86A/86C, 80 / 80A, 75, and 76 all serve the stop a few yards from the former station. All with the exception of the 80 / 80A stop by the Adelphi Hotel a few minutes walk from Central or Lime Street

The 80 route as also used to serve this stop but was rerouted via Chinatown to reduce traffic congestion thus one has yo alight at St Luke's and walk. The 76 approaches from London Road but again has a stop near Line Street.

Going the other way along Smithdown both 86A and 80A go to the airport with other journeys on the 80 / 86 calling at or starting from Liverpool South Parkway.

The bus service is so good that one doesn't really need to check the timetable except for very early or late buses. Just go to the stop and wait.

I don't think a reopened Sefton Park can compete and might well be a waste of money which could be better spent elsewhere.

It may be able to attract new customers who wouldn't use the bus. That part of Smithdown Road is pretty safe when I've been there, but parts of Garston/Speke can be pretty dicey.

 

[CaramellDansen]

Personally I consider that report to be seriously flawed. It totally ignores the value of connections between local rail services and long distance services at Liverpool Lime Street. In my opinion, connecting City Line services to Northern Line services would be of little value - just how much demand is there for through services. The only real value would be if they were planning through services to the Wirral, especially Chester - but that is not what they are proposing.

Sending City Line trains to Liverpool Central would mean that passengers for (e.g.) London or Birmingham would need to walk to Lime Street - often carrying luggage, or take the time-consuming diversion (via, and change at) Moorfields. Lime Street is also closer than Central to many of the city centre bus stops.

I basically agree. Its value for me was in the surveying of the Wapping Tunnel exclusively. I personally think the aforementioned Airport line or a line to Warrington via Ditton would be more valuable, especially since Lime Street's City line services are close to Central and definitely not worth the effort to remove the short walk.

it is very clear that it never had a particularly good service.

Isn't that putting the cart before the horse? If there are no trains, there are no passengers; blaming the passengers for not taking trains from Sefton Park when none run is baffling.
It's not exactly a sparse outer-city suburb. There are a lot of people there who need transit. Built it and they will come!

I don't think a reopened Sefton Park can compete and might well be a waste of money which could be better spent elsewhere.

The amount of money that two small platforms cost? We're not talking about laying new track or digging tunnels, you know?
If the line is going to run through there, what's the harm in stopping??
Not to mention, people trust the reliability of the train more, as well as being quieter, more comfortable and safer.
Anyone who's been on an Arriva bus would probably agree!

 

[John Luxton]

The amount of money that two small platforms cost? We're not talking about laying new track or digging tunnels, you know?
If the line is going to run through there, what's the harm in stopping??
Not to mention, people trust the reliability of the train more, as well as being quieter, more comfortable and safer.
Anyone who's been on an Arriva bus would probably agree!

Sefton Park had four platforms faces. I do not share the same confidence that people would come if one operated an intense service. The Stagecoach and Arriva buses on Smithdown provide a very good service. I am not sure how a train can be safer than the bus. Lonely unstaffed platform accessed by a subway (that was the original arrangement) is not as safe as a bus stop on a pavement which in that area has a lot of footfall.

I have lived in the are all my life and know it well.

 

[urbophile]

The walk is extremely easy at street level; the vast majority of interchanging passengers do this (anecdotally as a former local). That's probably nicer than walking through a subway that smells of wee. This sort of subway is so 1970s, the trend is to remove them (and the one between the station at Chester and the town can't be removed soon enough, it has to be said!)

It is I think roughly twice to three times as far as Piccadilly concourse to 13/14.

The walk takes about 6-7 minutes. Certainly my norm was leaving a train at Lime St arriving at xx00 and easily making, via the Central toilets, an Ormskirk train at xx10.

If you really don't want to walk (e.g. it's throwing down) you can always transfer via the Loop.

It is an easy walk when the Clayton Square precinct is open. At other times one has to face the music (literally) and trudge past all those hideous karaoke pubs. Though I suppose going via Lime Street itself is no further.

But the original comment (#131 above) suggested that diverting City Line trains away from Lime Street would disadvantage interchanging passengers. To an extent I suppose, but the vast majority of City Line passengers would not be doing that, or they would or could have an easier interchange elsewhere (eg South Parkway, Huyton, Wigan). It does make sense to concentrate all local trains onto the local Metro; it's just a pity that only the Wirral Line interchanges directly with the main line.

(BTW where is the subway at Chester? I've never noticed one.)

Sefton Park had four platforms faces. I do not share the same confidence that people would come if one operated an intense service. The Stagecoach and Arriva buses on Smithdown provide a very good service. I am not sure how a train can be safer than the bus. Lonely unstaffed platform accessed by a subway (that was the original arrangement) is not as safe as a bus stop on a pavement which in that area has a lot of footfall.

I have lived in the are all my life and know it well.

You wouldn't need four platforms if it was just served by the slow (as would be Metro) lines. The same argument about bus services would apply to Baltic, which is even nearer the city centre and within walking distance. Buses at least heading out of town in 'rush' hour can take ages. Also, the bus serves Liverpool One and the shopping district only; the train would head on to Moorfields for the business district/ Pier Head, and connect to the rest of the city region. Obviously a sparse hourly or half-hourly service would not attract much custom, but surely no-one is suggesting that?

 

[CaramellDansen]

Sefton Park had four platforms faces.

Okay? I'm only asking for two. What intercity trains are going to be stopping at Sefton Park, anyway?
My idea was to use the slow lanes (the two to the west) for the aforementioned Airport line; but if that isn't put into place, letting the slow stopper City line trains use the slow lanes would be worthwhile even if the Airport line isn't built.

I am not sure how a train can be safer than the bus.

I have seen many more crimes happen on buses and at bus stops than on trains and at train stations. Train stations are monitored by CCTV, bus stops are not. Trains have a guard on board to deal with potential disturbances, buses do not. I refuse to believe you have seen more crimes on and around trains than on and around buses. That's just inconceivable to me.

I do not share the same confidence that people would come if one operated an intense service.

So what? The Airport line would be going through there anyway. If worse were to come to worst, they can just serve the station every other train.
If the Airport line is not implemented, it's my belief City line stoppers should go via the slow lanes (as mentioned above), and the above "worse come to worst" situation applies here too.
There is very little to lose out on here. I really do not understand your disapproval.

 

[Bletchleyite]

(BTW where is the subway at Chester? I've never noticed one.)

It's fairly hard to walk from the station to the main shopping street and not use it. The walk around to avoid it is quite long. It's at the roundabout.

 

[urbophile]

It's fairly hard to walk from the station to the main shopping street and not use it. The walk around to avoid it is quite long. It's at the roundabout.

Oh that one. I though you meant directly from the station.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Oh that one. I though you meant directly from the station.

No, I was using it as an example of why a subway from Lime St to Central would not be desirable.

 

[John Luxton]

Okay? I'm only asking for two. What intercity trains are going to be stopping at Sefton Park, anyway?
My idea was to use the slow lanes (the two to the west) for the aforementioned Airport line; but if that isn't put into place, letting the slow stopper City line trains use the slow lanes would be worthwhile even if the Airport line isn't built.

I have seen many more crimes happen on buses and at bus stops than on trains and at train stations. Train stations are monitored by CCTV, bus stops are not. Trains have a guard on board to deal with potential disturbances, buses do not. I refuse to believe you have seen more crimes on and around trains than on and around buses. That's just inconceivable to me.

So what? The Airport line would be going through there anyway. If worse were to come to worst, they can just serve the station every other train.
If the Airport line is not implemented, it's my belief City line stoppers should go via the slow lanes (as mentioned above), and the above "worse come to worst" situation applies here too.
There is very little to lose out on here. I really do not understand your disapproval.

South Parkway, West Allerton and Mossley Hill have four platforms therefore would presume Sefton Park would also get four.

As for seeing crimes on the railways and on buses.

Perhaps I have been lucky and not witnessed any actually in progress. On a bus one is with in easy shouting range of the driver and many of the buses have CCTV anyway.

Nearest thing I have seen recently was someone being arrested crossing the bridge at Chester in summer 2022 when two plain clothes chaps waiting on the bridge flashed their id and grabbed someone walking close to me.

 

[CaramellDansen]

South Parkway, West Allerton and Mossley Hill have four platforms therefore would presume Sefton Park would also get four.

That's because the City line stoppers and the intercity expresses both share the same line, despite a perfectly usable set of slow lanes existing, so the stoppers use the fast lanes. Two of the platforms at each of those stations are either overgrown and mothballed, or (in LSP's case) extremely rarely used.
It's also because the proposed Airport line doesn't exist yet. I believe the four-platform arrangement is a hold-over from before the slow lanes were cut off from being able to go anywhere but Alstom's depot (what a stupid idea)

On a bus one is with in easy shouting range of the driver and many of the buses have CCTV anyway.

You've clearly never been assaulted on a bus, then. I hope you never do, but if you do I'm sure you'll come to agree with me thanks to the hindsight of having been through it yourself. Not to mention, if I were a gambling lady, I'd bet on a train conductor/guard being more likely to intervene than a bus driver.
CCTV doesn't prevent crime (in the direct sense), it basically just helps the police find the perpetrator (if they can be arsed...).
Not to mention that you've moved the goalposts; the point wasn't about vehicles having CCTV but the stations/stops! You said it yourself:

Lonely unstaffed platform accessed by a subway (that was the original arrangement) is not as safe as a bus stop on a pavement which in that area has a lot of footfall.

 

[Vinnym]

It's fairly hard to walk from the station to the main shopping street and not use it. The walk around to avoid it is quite long. It's at the roundabout.

When you come out of the station, if go down the right hand side of City Road, turn right at the bottom and use the two pedestrian crossings, it’s only fractionally further and avoids the horrible subway you were referring to.
I must concur with you, the subway stinks, is quite frequently frequented by undesirables and is prone to flood in wet weather.