Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
interestrateripoff

Five Northern Cities Set To Outline £15Bn Transport Plan

Recommended Posts

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28654134

Five cities in the North of England are to unveil a £15bn plan to improve road and rail connections in the region.

The joint One North report will include plans for a new 125mph inter-city rail link, faster links with Newcastle and better access to ports and airports.

It has been developed by an alliance of five cities - Leeds, Liverpool, Manchester, Newcastle and Sheffield.

It comes after George Osborne said faster links between Manchester and Leeds could create a "powerhouse".

The report will be presented to the chancellor in Manchester later.

In a speech in June the chancellor said the cities in the north of England were individually strong but were "collectively not strong enough".

He said better road and rail links would allow cities across northern England - from Liverpool to Hull - to create a "northern global powerhouse" and "take on the world", as London had done.

The chancellor said the plan for a high-speed rail link between Manchester and Leeds could cost up to £7bn - but could be cheaper if existing rail lines were updated.

Considering the money proposed to be spunked on HS2 this seems cheap, however it might mean less jam for London.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another opportunity for Leese to foist a congestion charge on Manchester to "pay for it all".

We ******ed you off last time, we'll ****** you off next time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they can pull themselves together this can only be a good move.....you only have to look at Germany it doesn't all go on in Berlin......

It should not have to be to travel anywhere you need to travel via one place.....all roads/tracks should not lead to Rome.

Edited by winkie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheaper still would be to increase the speed limit on motorways to 120.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheaper still would be to increase the speed limit on motorways to 120.

Yes, this. Just like in - oh - Germany.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A similar price to CrossRail in London? (although Crossrail probably will carry more passengers daily).

At least a fair amount of the money spent on this will be going to building workers, architects, rail staff etc who will contribute to the local economies. And maybe we needn't feel so envious when travelling on top notch rail services in Europe (Germany or France or Spain etc).

But is there a great demand for individuals to travel between Liverpool and say Leeds/Bradford? Just asking, there may well be?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But is there a great demand for individuals to travel between Liverpool and say Leeds/Bradford? Just asking, there may well be?

When I lived in Sheffield I'd certainly have benefited quite a lot from a better line to Leeds.

Manchester was less of an issue for me, 'cos I went there relatively rarely and not in too much of a hurry to enjoy the scenery. But a fast line would certainly enhance the cities. And as for Liverpool, a well-designed line would have made the difference between going there and "far too much hassle".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The first think I can see is that it seems silly to build a new rail line that can only support 125 mph running. Any new lines really should be built to support higher speeds. Upgrading it in future would cost far more overall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would also say that Birmingham should have formed part of that plan - else it will simply slip to becoming a dormitory of London.

True, the midlands as a whole has seen no investment in road or rail or anything else in the past two decades. People forget that it was the midlands that led the industrial revolution and even now towns such as Coventry lead in automotive and Wolverhampton leads in high-end aerospace. The Midlands would be a much wiser use of money as it has a much better potential to increase UK GDP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there anything that this apostle of the Hard Left won't throw money at?

Any world-improving scheme or harebrained initiative that doesn't inspire his confidence?

Edited by zugzwang

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Joining up the city centres is a daft idea. What is needed is better transport within the travel-to-work zones of these cities. New stations and new lines are needed that serve the places were people are employed now, not were they were employed 100 years ago.

London's success is built on the tube, and also on internal overground rail services.

They also need to sack all persons in charge of roads and highways and put in some people with an interest in getting people around more quickly, not more slowly, as is the case at present.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheaper still would be to increase the speed limit on motorways to 120.

Firstly the average motorist isn't very good at going at 120mph, especially those that currently travel like that in the outside lane.....failure to anticipate the car that wanders into the outside lane from the middle lane, failure to anticipate slower cars in front. Both of which lead to sharp breaking, a chain reaction down the motorway of sharp braking involving a thousand vehicles and a log jam. Speed is often the intial cause of traffic delay on a motorway.

Speedsters drive with blinkers.

Edited by crashmonitor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Joining up the city centres is a daft idea. What is needed is better transport within the travel-to-work zones of these cities. New stations and new lines are needed that serve the places were people are employed now, not were they were employed 100 years ago.

London's success is built on the tube, and also on internal overground rail services.

They also need to sack all persons in charge of roads and highways and put in some people with an interest in getting people around more quickly, not more slowly, as is the case at present.

It may come as a surprise to you that many people commute between Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds and Sheffield every day.

Also between all these Cities and London. It's not either/or but *all*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It may come as a surprise to you that many people commute between Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds and Sheffield every day.

Also between all these Cities and London. It's not either/or but *all*

I'm all for more transport infrastructure investment across the board, but in the real world there have to be priorities. i can't see that commuters between city centre locations (i.e not the residential areas) is the priority.

Most productive employment (i.e. not retail and not public sector) is on wind-swept business parks on the edge of town. These should be the priorities for new rail services.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Joining up the city centres is a daft idea. What is needed is better transport within the travel-to-work zones of these cities. New stations and new lines are needed that serve the places were people are employed now, not were they were employed 100 years ago.

London's success is built on the tube, and also on internal overground rail services.

They also need to sack all persons in charge of roads and highways and put in some people with an interest in getting people around more quickly, not more slowly, as is the case at present.

That's is my instinctive view (subsequent comments noted)

Making transport better is a great idea, especially as it may well pay for itself. But I'm not really convinced it will make the region more attractive to businesses, investors or inhabitants.

I also think that above a certain size, cities become less efficient rather than more efficient, e.g. governments have keep pumping ever more money into London, to make it look like it's a success.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This can only be a good thing. I'd go as far as to include Durham, York and/or Sunderland. Going North-South on the train is pretty straight forward. East to west is a nightmare. I can't even imagine taking a train from Newcastle to Manchester, which is sad really. It would be great to go Newcastle to York then on to Manchester at genuine intercity speeds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This can only be a good thing. I'd go as far as to include Durham, York and/or Sunderland. Going North-South on the train is pretty straight forward. East to west is a nightmare. I can't even imagine taking a train from Newcastle to Manchester, which is sad really. It would be great to go Newcastle to York then on to Manchester at genuine intercity speeds.

Newcastle to Manchester is a relatively good journey. You get as far as York on the intercity, then change to a train going west to Leeds and trans-pennine to Manchester. Or maybe there's even something direct.

Leeds to Sheffield is the truly horrendous journey. Over an hour, horribly uncomfortable, and a strong candidate for the ugliest industrial wasteland in the country. Unless it's much-improved since my time there!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yay, more choo choo trains. Just as driverless cars (improving safety, relieving congestion and lowering costs) become a reality. Holy 1850 batman.

Doesn't matter who is driving the cars, cities with dense populations will clog up in no time if even a decent % of people use a car. Even those with 3+ lanes on every streets don't function. See LA, Moscow, many Chinese cities etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm all in favour of this investment. Travelling is something practically everyone does every day, often for hours, and anything that can be done to lessen that so more time at home with families or less time getting to work or for leisure is fine with me.

This isn't even a lot of money - it's £15bn over a huge number of years and no doubt much will have to be private.

It's like Crossrail in London - £15 billion total cost but only £5 billion is from central government and that's over about 10 years - £500m a year is hardly a lot for something so transformative. The UK increased its foreign aid budget by about 5 times that amount last year alone. It spends more on the Afghan war each year. There's many other wastes of money in the UK's £700bn budget, which even a small % increase of which going to transport could do wonders whilst cutting so much of the fluff that does little for your average Briton.

The UK spends so little on infrastructure compared to many developed nations, and its something that has the ability to improve the lives of just about everyone. It should be a far bigger priority in gov spending.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This can only be a good thing. I'd go as far as to include Durham, York and/or Sunderland. Going North-South on the train is pretty straight forward. East to west is a nightmare. I can't even imagine taking a train from Newcastle to Manchester, which is sad really. It would be great to go Newcastle to York then on to Manchester at genuine intercity speeds.

How about a dual carriage way linking York with Hull.

Trains suck its entering a place where you can be fined for being 5 minutes late and they are overpriced especially if you make a last minute decision to travel on one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Firstly the average motorist isn't very good at going at 120mph, especially those that currently travel like that in the outside lane.....failure to anticipate the car that wanders into the outside lane from the middle lane, failure to anticipate slower cars in front. Both of which lead to sharp breaking, a chain reaction down the motorway of sharp braking involving a thousand vehicles and a log jam. Speed is often the intial cause of traffic delay on a motorway.

Speedsters drive with blinkers.

+1

however I'd probably go one further than that.

the big lorries leapfrogging between slow and middle lane is just as dangerous.

the speed differential really, as these buggers are limited to 56/60 mph.

also the roads are not constructed sufficiently to cater for thousands of them...the infrastructure design is mostly 50 years old now, and was probably OK for 20-tonners, but not for the 32-38 variety we have as a matter of course now.

they really need to look at building re-inforced "freightways", for commercial vehicles only, running fairly close to the main arteries

(M20,M11,M1,M4 and M6 in england, with links to the ports like felixtowe etc- at present quite a lot of these are still only connected by A road for the coastal 10 miles)

Edited by oracle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   225 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.