• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Merseyrail severed lines question

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Gareth

Established Member
Joined
10 Mar 2011
Messages
1,449
Location
Liverpool
Pretty sure they put money towards the GRIP3 work, along with Merseytravel & Network Real. So yes. Great, isn't it?
 

childwallblues

Established Member
Joined
3 Jul 2014
Messages
2,823
Location
Liverpool, UK
Skem has now been up and running for 50 years now. We are into the third generation who now need to be accommodated. Whilst I'm sure they have kept their football allegiances what I would like to know is the demand for such journeys to be linked into Merseyrail. Do they see Wigan as the town to go and shop or do they really need options to be able to travel to both Liverpool and Manchester for work opportunities? I simply don't know and I'm always weary of any aspirations emanating from Merseytravel.

Connections to Wigan by bus are much better than to Liverpool. A train service from Skelmersdale Centre would undoubtedly change that.
 

ivanhoe

Member
Joined
15 Jul 2009
Messages
929
From the Wiganers perspective Skem is like an edge of town industrial estate, lots of logistics and call centre jobs. About half of all jobs and population in West Lancashire are in Skelmersdale and these are the commuting patterns for West Lancashire (so around half would be Skem itself with some geographic fluctuation i.e. would be higher proportion flows in Skem between close neighbours than West Lancashire as a whole, its a large mostly rural county apart from Skelmersdale and Ormskirk surrounded by Southport, Merseyside, Wigan, Warrington and Chorley)

People commuting in to West Lancashire
Sefton 5,220 (13%)
Wigan 4,763 (12%)
St. Helens 1,775 (4%)
Liverpool 1,461 (4%)
Chorley 1,077 (3%)
Knowsley 992 (2%)
South Ribble 849 (2%)
Warrington 396 (1%)
Preston 353 (0.9%)
Bolton 287 (0.7%)
Wirral 285 (0.7%)
Other 2,371 (6%)
Liverpool City Region LEP 9,925 (25%)
Greater Manchester LEP 5,762 (14%)
Lancashire LEP 2,800 (7%)
Total in-flow 19,800


And people commuting out of West Lancashire

Sefton 5,476 (13%)
Liverpool 3,042 (7%)
Wigan 2,483 (6%)
Preston 1,298 (3%)
St. Helens 1,177 (3%)
South Ribble 1,177 (3%)
Knowsley 1,149 (3%)
Chorley 942 (2%)
Manchester 629 (1%)
Warrington 626 (1%)
Fylde 282 (0.7%)
Bolton 280 (0.7%)
Salford 278 (0.7%)
Trafford 249 (0.6%)
Halton 211 (0.5%)
Wirral 174 (0.4%)
Other 2,520 (6%)
Liverpool City Region LEP 11,229 (26%)
Greater Manchester LEP 4,208 (10%)
Lancashire LEP 4,357 (10%)
Total out-flow 22,000


https://infrastructure.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/document/2744220

Thanks for this. Also thanks to Gareth, NW, and Childwall Blues for their input.
 

urbophile

Established Member
Joined
26 Nov 2015
Messages
2,059
Location
Liverpool
How much of the funding for previous Merseyrail developments came from the EU? And was the Skem link projected on the basis that this would be available?
 

WatcherZero

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2010
Messages
10,272
I don't think Merseyrail has itself had any EU funding, the Council/CA have mostly spent EU grants on other things (cruise liner terminal, airport terminal that opened in 1986, roads and a lot of public buildings/skills training). Closest rail related thing is EU funding used to build the road between Liverpool Parkway and the Airport.

Skem link is on Lancashire County Councils priority list and they have funded Grip 3 study and another study on which station location to choose, I think Grip 1-2 was 50/50 funded with Merseytravel. Currently the targeted funding would be either getting it included as part of Network Rail next programme of works CP6 or Lancashire CC funding it through their next five year block grant from the Dft.


http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/17-things-european-funding-done-10925208
 
Last edited:

Gareth

Established Member
Joined
10 Mar 2011
Messages
1,449
Location
Liverpool
According to Railfuture the timeable is...

Jan 2017: GRIP3 concluded
Jan 2019: GRIP4 (Single options selection) complete
Apr 2021 - April 2013: GRIP6 (Construction, commissioning)
Dec 2023: Train services start.

It really is a no brainer. Kirkby is not a great place for a terminus. As a result, it is comfortably the least busiest of the three Merseyrail Northern Line services and Skelmersdale, plus Rainford and an extra station in the east of Kirkby should make it more efficient. I wonder if it could actually justify 4tph at some point, considering to Kirkby already has it, with it being only two or three stations more. The profile of the Skem service wouldn't be too different to the Ormskirk branch which also has 4tph. The current assumption is 2tph Merseyrail and 1tph Northern but 4tph Merseyrail and 2tph Northern is dubbed 'aspirational'. Not sure if the Northern services would both be stoppers or one a semi-fast in this happy scenario.
 

urbophile

Established Member
Joined
26 Nov 2015
Messages
2,059
Location
Liverpool
I don't think Merseyrail has itself had any EU funding, the Council/CA have mostly spent EU grants on other things (cruise liner terminal, airport terminal that opened in 1986, roads and a lot of public buildings/skills training). Closest rail related thing is EU funding used to build the road between Liverpool Parkway and the Airport.

Brunswick station certainly had EU funding: there was a big board saying so until fairly recently. Maybe that is the only one though.
 

WatcherZero

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2010
Messages
10,272
Cant see anything specifically mentioning the station but some references to a £20m social cohesion grant to Granby-Toxteth in the early 90's to help heal the community after the riots of 81 and 85.
 
Last edited:

8A Rail

Established Member
Joined
6 Dec 2012
Messages
1,291
Location
Liverpool
I don't think Merseyrail has itself had any EU funding, the Council/CA have mostly spent EU grants on other things (cruise liner terminal, airport terminal that opened in 1986, roads and a lot of public buildings/skills training). Closest rail related thing is EU funding used to build the road between Liverpool Parkway and the Airport.

Skem link is on Lancashire County Councils priority list and they have funded Grip 3 study and another study on which station location to choose, I think Grip 1-2 was 50/50 funded with Merseytravel. Currently the targeted funding would be either getting it included as part of Network Rail next programme of works CP6 or Lancashire CC funding it through their next five year block grant from the Dft.


http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/17-things-european-funding-done-10925208

Liverpool Cruise Liner Terminal grant is or has been paid back as part of the conditions in becoming a "turnaround" terminal. There are many roads between LSP and the Airport, most were already there, so I assume it is a small section of road somewhere along the journey you may be referring too?
 

WatcherZero

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2010
Messages
10,272
Grant only had to be repaid because the council violated state aid rules when it petitioned for the change in usage. The conditions of the grant (specified by UK government) was that the ferry terminal could only be used for calls and not as a start/end point of cruises so as not to compete with private funded ports like Southampton which didn't receive public grants. The council only had to repay £5.3m, half the UK portion (£9.2m) of the grant not the £11m EU portion. Southampton chamber of business collected a 12,000 signature petition and won a court battle that the stipulated grant conditions had to be followed.

Road I believe it was the A561 from where it originally terminated in Garston 1930 through to the A562 replacing the B5170 constructed during WW2 as a bypass of the aerodrome since they plonked it on top of the original road. And possibly the A5275 too. It tied together the EU funded projects of Garston and Speke business parks and the building of the airports modern terminal.
http://www.sabre-roads.org.uk/maps/tiles/os32/11/1007/663.jpg
 
Last edited:

childwallblues

Established Member
Joined
3 Jul 2014
Messages
2,823
Location
Liverpool, UK
I don't think Merseyrail has itself had any EU funding, the Council/CA have mostly spent EU grants on other things (cruise liner terminal, airport terminal that opened in 1986, roads and a lot of public buildings/skills training). Closest rail related thing is EU funding used to build the road between Liverpool Parkway and the Airport.

Skem link is on Lancashire County Councils priority list and they have funded Grip 3 study and another study on which station location to choose, I think Grip 1-2 was 50/50 funded with Merseytravel. Currently the targeted funding would be either getting it included as part of Network Rail next programme of works CP6 or Lancashire CC funding it through their next five year block grant from the Dft.


http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/17-things-european-funding-done-10925208

Which road was that?
 

urbophile

Established Member
Joined
26 Nov 2015
Messages
2,059
Location
Liverpool
Road I believe it was the A561 from where it originally terminated in Garston 1930 through to the A562 replacing the B5170 constructed during WW2 as a bypass of the aerodrome since they plonked it on top of the original road. And possibly the A5275 too. It tied together the EU funded projects of Garston and Speke business parks and the building of the airports modern terminal.
http://www.sabre-roads.org.uk/maps/tiles/os32/11/1007/663.jpg

Isn't that the Garston bypass? Which goes nowhere near LSP.
 

8A Rail

Established Member
Joined
6 Dec 2012
Messages
1,291
Location
Liverpool
Grant only had to be repaid because the council violated state aid rules when it petitioned for the change in usage. The conditions of the grant (specified by UK government) was that the ferry terminal could only be used for calls and not as a start/end point of cruises so as not to compete with private funded ports like Southampton which didn't receive public grants. The council only had to repay £5.3m, half the UK portion (£9.2m) of the grant not the £11m EU portion. Southampton chamber of business collected a 12,000 signature petition and won a court battle that the stipulated grant conditions had to be followed.

Yes you are correct Southampton kicked up a fuss over the money that Liverpool City Council got in relation to the new cruise liner terminal but only when the Council decided they wanted to have "turnaround" facilities as the terminal was and is very popular. LCC as you stated above, agreed to refund some funds back, (which I thought was EU money) so there is no problem and matter finalised. However, I am not sure what the fuss was about given that Southampton have 5 cruise liner terminals, it is the base for a few cruise line's and always will be, that is not never going to change. However, it did tickle / surprise me that Southampton kicked up the fuss in the first place thinking that Liverpool was going to take some of their traffic away which was never the case nor will it ever be. Liverpool has become another terminal for Cruise Line's to call at rather than taking any ship's away from poor old Southampton! :lol:

I seem to recall though that Southampton "ship container" terminals wanted better / improved rail access as capacity was being constrained and in consequence major investment by NR to bring the main lines to the terminal's upto spec which from information recd was partly EU funded. I don't recall ABP kicking up a fuss that these improvements should not had EU money as they benefitted from this expenditure?

Road I believe it was the A561 from where it originally terminated in Garston 1930 through to the A562 replacing the B5170 constructed during WW2 as a bypass of the aerodrome since they plonked it on top of the original road. And possibly the A5275 too. It tied together the EU funded projects of Garston and Speke business parks and the building of the airports modern terminal.
http://www.sabre-roads.org.uk/maps/tiles/os32/11/1007/663.jpg

Going by the description, this is the dual carriageway that runs along side of the rail line into Garston FLT. If that is the road, then it is only a short stretch between the junctions of Horrocks Avenue and St Mary's Road in Garston which is the A561. All other roads in that area have been there for a long long time with the exception of any new roads built on the site of the old airport. The road in question was built long before LSP was built and also before (if I recall correctly) the old airport was developed. I am not aware of Garston Business Park either, so does it have another name or you referring to the area dominated by the Container Terminal and Docks facility?
 
Last edited:

Wavertreelad

Member
Joined
24 Feb 2013
Messages
709
Yes you are correct Southampton kicked up a fuss over the money that Liverpool City Council got in relation to the new cruise liner terminal but only when the Council decided they wanted to have "turnaround" facilities as the terminal was and is very popular. LCC as you stated above, agreed to refund some funds back, (which I thought was EU money) so there is no problem and matter finalised. However, I am not sure what the fuss was about given that Southampton have 5 cruise liner terminals, it is the base for a few cruise line's and always will be, that is not never going to change. However, it did tickle / surprise me that Southampton kicked up the fuss in the first place thinking that Liverpool was going to take some of their traffic away which was never the case nor will it ever be. Liverpool has become another terminal for Cruise Line's to call at rather than taking any ship's away from poor old Southampton! :lol:

I seem to recall though that Southampton "ship container" terminals wanted better / improved rail access as capacity was being constrained and in consequence major investment by NR to bring the main lines to the terminal's upto spec which from information recd was partly EU funded. I don't recall ABP kicking up a fuss that these improvements should not had EU money as they benefitted from this expenditure?

The bizarre part of the Southampton argument about the LCC terminal was that they had grown their cruise business for years under public ownership as the British Transport Dock Board until the port was privatised in 1981. The Port also gained from considerable public funding after privatisation to allow it to expand, witness the near direct motorway access amongst other projects. Rather than harm Southampton's case, the success of the LLC has probably enhanced it's position as Britain's premier cruise port because the LLC has introduced more people to the cruise industry.

An EU directive introduced a few years ago in order to prevent state subsidies to ports forces port operators to fund a proportion of the landside infrastructure cost. In order to recover that cost the Port of Felixstowe which was first to be hit with the cost introduced a GBP10.50 per laden import container infrastructure charge. London Gateway has a charge a similar charge of about GBP6.50 per laden container and Southampton just GBP3.00 per laden container.

http://www.dpworldsouthampton.com/about-us/tariff-and-charges/

Peel have in the last two years introduced an infrastructure charge of GBP3.00 on laden import containers to cover their eventual contribution to landside costs.

Given the relevant difference in the total number of containers handled at each port, the works involved and differing costs levied by the individual port operators, you can draw your own conclusions.

One thing is for sure is that we are probably likely to see the largest changes in the individual shipping lines serving in the main UK Ports starting over the next six months as the major 18 global shipping lines form three Alliances, from the existing four. One partner of the only Alliance to likely remain unchanged is MSC already has started the ball rolling with very public announcements about the congestion in Felixstowe. Tonight Lloyds List is reporting

MSC seeks alternate UK ports amid Felixstowe congestion
Friday 07 October 2016, 17:18

MEDITERRANEAN Shipping Co is in negotiations with a number of UK ports as potential alternatives to future shipments into Felixstowe, as congestion at the UK’s largest port continues. A spokesperson for the Geneva-based carrier, Felixstowe’s biggest liner customer, told Lloyd’s List that it...

https://www.lloydsli...ticle539127.ece

Sorry I don't have access to the full article.


And suddenly today Peel is pushing the Maersk feeder service on their official Twitter site...no coincidence perhaps that both Maersk and MSC are founding members of the 2M Alliance.

https://twitter.com/PeelPorts/status/784391394412466176

https://twitter.com/PeelPorts/status/784388924189777921
 

childwallblues

Established Member
Joined
3 Jul 2014
Messages
2,823
Location
Liverpool, UK
Liverpool Cruise Liner Terminal grant is or has been paid back as part of the conditions in becoming a "turnaround" terminal. There are many roads between LSP and the Airport, most were already there, so I assume it is a small section of road somewhere along the journey you may be referring too?

Almost certainly the last quarter mile from Hale Road into the terminal.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top