Sandhills station

[Jacko93]

So their Mayor has committed to providing transport improvements in time for the increased volume of traffic from a stadium redevelopment?

What an amateur.

He obviously hasn't consulted with Commander Steve and some of our esteemed posters who believe an evolutionary process, whereby you build a stadium and then tell supporters they live with a make do and mend travel plan until dedicated infrastructure arrives in a decades time.

You can see where Birmingham's Mayor Richard Parker went wrong cant you?

What has he promised there that won't be delivered by LCR by opening day of BMD?

 

[BullensRoad]

So their Mayor has committed to providing transport improvements in time for the increased volume of traffic from a stadium redevelopment?

What an amateur.

He obviously hasn't consulted with Commander Steve and some of our esteemed posters who believe an evolutionary process, whereby you build a stadium and then tell supporters they live with a make do and mend travel plan until dedicated infrastructure arrives in a decades time.

You can see where Birmingham's Mayor Richard Parker went wrong cant you?

Spot on Dave, we have our differences but the LCCR have been shown up for what they are, as well as Tom Hughes, it doesn't matter if you've worked on or had experience in these areas, it doesn't meant they're right.

We're being left behind because of people like that. How can you honestly justify a £100'm investment to build a station at a honey pot site for the younger generation and claim it's to relieve stress at central station? Which isn't even under stress!!

Then also say a 53k seater stadium will only be used fortnightly so it didn't make sense.

It's honestly head banging stuff.

 

[BullensRoad]

What has he promised there that won't be delivered by LCR by opening day of BMD?

I think this is more of an attack at Davek than really understanding the original post. They've announced plans to provide their infrastructure before a spade has even been put into the ground. We never had that.

 

[Jacko93]

I think this is more of an attack at Davek than really understanding the original post. They've announced plans to provide their infrastructure before a spade has even been put into the ground. We never had that.

Did they not? My question is, what have they said they will do here, that want suggested as part of the transport plan that was supplied as part of the BMD planning application? Have LCR not promised similar?

Now, the proposed increase of capacity at Villa Park is very different to an entirely new stadium/capacity, which is fine, but, the promises are not much different.

It is no attack on DaveK at all, it is simply a a question of facts.

Birmingham may deliver a much large solution, that involves new stations or entirely new transport methodology by the time the expansion happens, but until then, there is no difference.

 

[BullensRoad]

Did they not? My question is, what have they said they will do here, that want suggested as part of the transport plan that was supplied as part of the BMD planning application? Have LCR not promised similar?

Now, the proposed increase of capacity at Villa Park is very different to an entirely new stadium/capacity, which is fine, but, the promises are not much different.

It is no attack on DaveK at all, it is simply a a question of facts.

Birmingham may deliver a much large solution, that involves new stations or entirely new transport methodology by the time the expansion happens, but until then, there is no difference.

No they didn't. So the rest of your points are redundant.

 

[Tom Hughes]

That's absolute balls mate. The station isn't going to relieve anything from central.

ANY additional city centre station can relieve some of the pressure on central. That's just basic logistics.

 

[BullensRoad]

ANY additional city centre station can relieve some of the pressure on central. That's just basic logistics.

Tom, you shout the loudest but you're not always the right answer. Central didn't and has never needed pressure easing. Never once has it had any capacity problems, why are you looking for problems that don't exist?

You'll reply to this with "you worked on such and such" but it's a very effective station.

Hand on heart I think you're one of the problems which has prevented our city from getting the infrastructure investment it needs.

Boomers like you never take accountability or acceptance that there's more qualified people than you who want continuous improvement.

 

[Tom Hughes]

Tom, you shout the loudest but you're not always the right answer. Central didn't and has never needed pressure easing. Never once has it had any capacity problems, why are you looking for problems that don't exist?

You'll reply to this with "you worked on such and such" but it's a very effective station.

Hand on heart I think you're one of the problems which has prevented our city from getting the infrastructure investment it needs.

Boomers like you never take accountability or acceptance that there's more qualified people than you who want continuous improvement.

What a peculiar accusation. I would be very interested to hear how you think I have "prevented our city getting the infrastructure investment it needs".

No-one said it wasn't an effective station. However, capacity contraints at Central were identified years ago. If you used the station regularly like me, you would know that access to the island platform is often stopped at peak times due to overcrowding. That's why its expansion is a key part of the city's long term rail strategy.

All nothing whatsoever to do with me.

 

[murphy89]

Does building a new station ever resolve the issues? Isn’t the real issue capacity on the actual trains? More people are accessing trains then they do at Goodison due to proximity of the stations to the ground and lack of other public transport links?

You can build a new Vauxhall station if you want but if people can’t on the train then it’s a bit pointless.

 

[Jacko93]

Tom, you shout the loudest but you're not always the right answer. Central didn't and has never needed pressure easing. Never once has it had any capacity problems, why are you looking for problems that don't exist?

You'll reply to this with "you worked on such and such" but it's a very effective station.

Hand on heart I think you're one of the problems which has prevented our city from getting the infrastructure investment it needs.

Boomers like you never take accountability or acceptance that there's more qualified people than you who want continuous improvement.

Central has never had any capacity problems? What a load of rubbish. Central station regularly has capacity issues. For many years now they have been working on designs and seeking funding to alleviate those issues.

 

[Jacko93]

No they didn't. So the rest of your points are redundant.

The stadium hasn't opened yet, so anything that they deliver will be delivered prior to opening. They have increased queuing areas, they have modelled the areas surrounding the station to ease access and are putting in new access and egress points, all of which they have promised in the Midlands. From that snippet shared, what have they promised that hasn't been promised, or actioned here?

More needs to be done, we all know that, but the example used is a poor one.

 

[gazzaa2]

Bit of a storm in a tea cup,the London Underground stations that serve the Prem stadiums there have never had many problems with crowds on match day over the years.

They run trains every couple of minutes. And some of the smaller stadiums would need transport improvements to get to over 50k like Arsenal and Spurs had to.

 

[Blue peter]

ANY additional city centre station can relieve some of the pressure on central. That's just basic logistics.

And logic

 

[Blue peter]

What a peculiar accusation. I would be very interested to hear how you think I have "prevented our city getting the infrastructure investment it needs".

No-one said it wasn't an effective station. However, capacity contraints at Central were identified years ago. If you used the station regularly like me, you would know that access to the island platform is often stopped at peak times due to overcrowding. That's why its expansion is a key part of the city's long term rail strategy.

All nothing whatsoever to do with me.

I would imagine that any additional transport infrastructure invested in, in that area won’t necessarily take place until such time as the surrounding area has been developed to ‘push the city centre’ a little more north where there would be more footfall more regularly than once a fortnight. Similar really also to the Baltic triangle which has underwent development over the last 10-15 years.

 

[gazzaa2]

Does building a new station ever resolve the issues? Isn’t the real issue capacity on the actual trains? More people are accessing trains then they do at Goodison due to proximity of the stations to the ground and lack of other public transport links?

You can build a new Vauxhall station if you want but if people can’t on the train then it’s a bit pointless.

Merseyrail's lack of capacity is a problem, but it's only London where you get tube style capacity and frequency. A new station would mean you could filter Sandhills for people travelling north on the Southport/Kirkby/Ormskirk lines and Vauxhall for people heading to the city centre then that would relieve much of the congestion.

Sandhills isn't really fit for purpose either and is still a trek from the ground, particularly if you're heading to town anyway. A new station could be better designed to manage crowds.