Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Lancashire County Council spending on public transport? Wow. That's a new one on me.
Pretty sure they put money towards the GRIP3 work, along with Merseytravel & Network Real. So yes. Great, isn't it?
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.
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
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.
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
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
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
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
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!
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?
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?
So that is just a little shorter than the 3.1 mile distance between LSP & LJL Airport then!Almost certainly the last quarter mile from Hale Road into the terminal.
So that is just a little shorter than the 3.1 mile distance between LSP & LJL Airport then!