TRAVEL.com ® Travel Forums - View Single Post

20th July 2008, 08:09 AM

Chris Tolley wrote:
> Brian Robertson wrote:
>
>> what is the point of picking Stalybridge for a park and ride scheme
>> (Where there seems to be no spare land) as against Guide Bridge
>> (where there is oodles of spare land) and it is nearer to the
>> motorway?
>
> Because there are services from Stalybridge to all main stations in
> Manchester*, whereas Guide Bridge only serves Piccadilly?
>
> * plus to Liverpool, Huddersfield, Leeds, and points east without adding
> any extra stops to existing service patterns.
>
>
> Overall, though, Guide Bridge does look the better option from the point
> of view of the land and M60, and services could be operated to Victoria
> if required, and also, dare we suggest it, to Stockport.
>
> However, joined-up thinking isn't always apparent in the North West's
> railways. Liverpool South Parkway isn't getting as many trains as it
> could do, which lessens its value as a P+R centre - the car park there
> only seems to get about 60% full, according to my observation.
>
> Same Dahn Sarf, though. Harlington Station on the BedPan line is only a
> mile from a junction on the M1, and not only gets just the slow trains,
> but also has a minuscule car park for its potential.
>

Which harks back to the fact that, with potential for 4 tracks and 4
platforms again, as well as lines heading in all directions and loads of
spare land, Guide Bridge should be the transport hub in Tameside, not
Stalybridge. It could relieve a lot of pressure on Piccadilly and seems
a better investment than, for instance, moving Crewe!

Brian.

PS Are you ever going to update your RCH maps website, Chris?

20th July 2008, 08:09 AM	#1 (permalink)
Brian Robertson Guest Posts: n/a Classified Rating: % ()	Park and Ride in Manchester Chris Tolley wrote: > Brian Robertson wrote: > >> what is the point of picking Stalybridge for a park and ride scheme >> (Where there seems to be no spare land) as against Guide Bridge >> (where there is oodles of spare land) and it is nearer to the >> motorway? > > Because there are services from Stalybridge to all main stations in > Manchester, whereas Guide Bridge only serves Piccadilly? > > plus to Liverpool, Huddersfield, Leeds, and points east without adding > any extra stops to existing service patterns. > > > Overall, though, Guide Bridge does look the better option from the point > of view of the land and M60, and services could be operated to Victoria > if required, and also, dare we suggest it, to Stockport. > > However, joined-up thinking isn't always apparent in the North West's > railways. Liverpool South Parkway isn't getting as many trains as it > could do, which lessens its value as a P+R centre - the car park there > only seems to get about 60% full, according to my observation. > > Same Dahn Sarf, though. Harlington Station on the BedPan line is only a > mile from a junction on the M1, and not only gets just the slow trains, > but also has a minuscule car park for its potential. > Which harks back to the fact that, with potential for 4 tracks and 4 platforms again, as well as lines heading in all directions and loads of spare land, Guide Bridge should be the transport hub in Tameside, not Stalybridge. It could relieve a lot of pressure on Piccadilly and seems a better investment than, for instance, moving Crewe! Brian. PS Are you ever going to update your RCH maps website, Chris?