Manchester rapid transit

Volume 3

The First Priority

November, 1968

Reports of the Working Party and the Consultants

Manchester Rapid Transit Study, Volume 2 Study of rapid transit systems and concepts,

Aug. 1967

This report has been digitised by Martin Dodge from

the Department of Geography, University of

Manchester. The digitisation was supported by the

Manchester Statistical Society’s Campion Fund.

Permission to digitise and release the report under

Creative Commons license was kindly granted by

Manchester Libraries, Information and Archives,

Manchester City Council.

(Email: archiveslocalstudies@manchester.gov.uk)

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-

NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License. 20 April 2014.

Copies of the reports of the study are available from:

MANCHESTER CITY TRANSPORT,

2 Devonshire Street North, Ardwick, Manchester, M 12 6JS

Copyright Reserved

Price Volume 1 £2. 2s. Od . Volume 2 £3. 3s. Od . Volume 3 £3. 3s. Od.

Printed by The William Morris Press Ltd . Wythenshawe, Manchester, M22 4SL.

Plans based upon Ordnance Survey map reproduced with the sanction of the Controller of H.M. Stationery Office.

.n) 1

Manchester rapid transit study

Commissioned jointly by:

The Corporation of Manchester;

The Ministry of Transport;

in association with British Railways.

Consulting Engineers:

De Leuw, Hennessey,

Chadwick, 0 hEocha.

Volume 3

Reports of the Working Party and the Consultants

Manchester rapid transit study

MEMBERS OF THE WORKING PARTY

CHAIRMAN: R. F. Bennett (to September, 1968),

J. Thompson (from October, 1968),

General Manager,

Manchester City Transport

MEMBERS: Lieut. Col. I. K. A. McNaughton-Headquarters

D. J . Lyness (to September, 1968)-Headquarters

A.G. Lyall .(from September, 1968)-Headquarters

Ministry

of

HONORARY SECRETARY :

J . D. Wallace,

Divisional Road Engineer, North West

C. P. Millard,

Divisional Manager, Manchester

F. W. Young (to June, 1968),

Assistant Planning Manager

J . Hayes, City Engineer & Surveyor

J.S . Millar, City Planning Officer

Sir Harry Page,

City Treasurer

Town Clerk of Manchester

G. C. Ogden, C.B.E.

Transport

l London Midland

r Region

j British Railways

l ~ Manchester

1

Corporation

J

The Working Party wish to thank the very many persons in the Ministry, British Railways, and the Corporation who have

contributed to the Study, and in particular the following :

City Planning Dept: J . Dea n

R. P. Ross

B. Parnell

City Engineer's Dept : K. M . Ledson, M .B.E.

Staff of SELNEC Transportation Study (SALTS) Group

City Transport Dept: E. H. Stiff

H. Gibbon

G. Watson

City Treasurer's Dept :C. Phillips

British Railways: F. Mitchell

Ministry of Transport : Staff of M athematical Advisory Unit

11

I'

Ii

R~PORT OF THE WORKING PARTY

::

Ii

i

1 INTRODUCTION

The Working Party was constituted in June, 1966, and its

terms of reference were :

(a) to supervise the work of Consultants who had been

commissioned by Manchester City Council and the

Ministry of Transport to undertake a comparative study

of various forms of rapid transit for Manchester ;

(b) to examine ways in which the existing road and rail

public passenger transport services in Manchester

might be improved.

The reports of the Working Party and the Consultants were

published as Volumes 1 and 2, respectively, of the Man­

chester Rapid Transit Study. The Consultants' Report was

published in August, 1967 and the Working Party Report

in September, 1967.

The latter report stressed that growing traffic congestion in

the peak periods was resulting in a serious deterioration in

the standard of bus services. As car ownership increased,

more people would want to use their cars to get to work and

the quality of these services would decline still further.

Appropriate traffic management and parking policies could

help. But at best, they could be expected to do no more than

halt the present trend of deterioration in bus services.

Neither did the complete solution lie in improvements in

road capacity. Even in the long term, public transport would

still have to provide for some 70% of the journeys to work

in the Central Area.

The Working Party therefore concluded that there was a

strong case for developing a modern rapid transit system on

' reserved track', insulated from the effects of road con ­

gestion and offering a service which for speed, reliability,

cost and general attractiveness would afford a much

improved service for large numbers of people who would

otherwise be dependent on the buses. Of the wide range of

possible systems studied, the Consultants and the Working

Party concluded that a modern urban electric railway would

be t he most advantageous for adoption in Manchester.

As a consequence of the recommendations made by the

Working Party, the City Council and the Ministry decided

to retain the Consultants (i) to investigate possible rail

rapid t ransit networks ; (ii) to identify the fi rst priority,

i.e. t he section which should form the first stage of con ­

struction of such a network ; and (iii) to develop a plan of

action which would permit services to be introduced at the

earliest date which practical considerations would allow.

The w ork of the Consultants has continued to be supervised

by the Working Party. The Consultants' report on this

further work has now been submitted and is appended in

this t hird volume of the Study.

Report of the W orking Party

2 THE CONSULTANTS' PRINCIPAL CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The Consultants' main conclusions and recommendations

are summarised in Section 1 of their report. Of these, the

principal one is that the first priority in the development of

a rapid transit network in the SELN EC conurbation should

be an entirely new rail line extending from Northenden to

Higher Blackley at Victoria Avenue with a branch serving

East Didsbury, and providing access to a yard at Heaton

Mersey, a total of 11 miles, as shown in Figure 1. The

central section of this line would pass under the city centre

below ground level, with stations provided at Oxford Road

(the existing station), St. Peter's Square, Market Street and

the existing Victoria Station. Along the rest of the route, the

line would be constructed in part underground, by cut­

and -cover methods, at ground level, or on an elevated

structure, to produce the best reconciliation between cost

and preservation of amenity. In due course the line might

be extended southwards to Wythenshawe and northwards

to Middleton, whilst the branch line could be extended to

Heald Green.

The Consultants' report also indicates that when improved

distribution through the central area is available through

interchange with the rapid transit line, there is likely to be a

substantially increased demand on British Railways suburban

services, provided these can be improved to acceptable

standards. The second major recommendation is that the

case for carrying out such improvements should be investi ­

gated further as soon as possible.

3 A POSSIBLE NETWORK FOR THE CONURBATION

A possible overall network of rapid transit and suburban rail

services for the conurbation is shown in Figu re 2. This shows

a fu rther Central Area link connecting Piccadilly Station,

Piccadilly Gardens and Market Street with Victoria Station.

The Consultants have suggested that this route deserves

consideration in the future but have stated that it in no way

matches the recommended one in terms of proximity to th e

major centres of activity in the Central Area.

4 OBSERVATIONS OF TH E W ORKING PARTY

The Consultants' findings show that the choice for the first

rapid transit line lies clearly in favour of a new route between

Northenden and Higher Blackley. Their recommendation for

the first priority was arrived at after evaluation of a con ­

siderable number of other possibilities which would, to a

considerable extent, have taken advantage of existing

British Railways rights of way.

7

At least a third of all peak period trips to and from the Central Area are generated in this corridor, where there is at present no rail service, and on the basis of traffic and financial estimates developed so far by the Consultants, the Working Party are satisfied that the first priority recom­mended by the Consultants is the right one.

The benefits would not be restricted to people living along this corridor as the city centre would be made more accessible from many parts of the conurbation by the provision of transfer facili ties for railway passengers at Oxford Road and Victoria stations, so that they could use the rapid transit line as a means of getting closer to their destinations in the Central Area. The potential revealed for increasing the capacity and quality of service on existing railway lines at modest capital cost opens up the possibility of achieving, in combination with the new Central Area facilities, very substantial improvements in public transport facilities for large numbers of people in many parts of the conurbation. The Working Party consider that British Railways' Altrincham and Bury lines in particular merit further study from this point of view.

The estimates of travel demand on which the Consultants' conclusions are based were derived from data collected for the purposes of the SELNEC Transportation Study. They are based on present day volumes and do not specifically allow for future growth, though the Consultants took future potential into account in broad terms when drawing up their conclusions. The assignment of the demand to the par­ticular routes which were studied was done by techniques developed by the Consultants. The role of the rapid transit line in a comprehensive transportation plan for the conur­bation will have to be substantiated by the results of the SELNEC Transportation Study, expected to be available about April, 1969. The estimates of demand will have to be similarly confirmed. However, an estimate has been made by the SELNEC Study of the number of public passenger transport trips which would have been diverted to the rapid transit line if it had been in existence in 1966 and this has provided some confirmation.

In reaching a conclusion in favour of the line from Northenden to Higher Blackley as a first priority, the Working Party have taken into account estimates of capital and operating costs prepared by the Consultants. These indicate that the capita l cost is likely to be about £50 million and that the line should be viable at realistic fare levels.

While a firm decision on the availability of grant from the Ministry of Transport towards the capital cost would be taken by the Ministry at a later date in the light of more fully developed estimates of capital and operating costs and of social and other benefits, the Working Party note that the project falls into a category which would be considered for grant normally at a rate of 75%.

The ea rliest date on which the recommended first stage could be brought into operation is December, 1973. It would, however, be possible, if financial or other con ­siderati ons demanded, to phase construction over a longer period. If this should prove necessary, the Consultants recommend that the first section to be constructed should be that from Northenden to Victoria Station (including the branch line to East Didsbury) and that the section from Victoria Station to Higher Blackley should follow as soon as possible thereafter.

5 FEATURES OF THE RECOMMENDED SYSTEM

The system would offer a frequent, fast and comfortable service to the city centre and to other points of main activity, including the Higher Education Precinct, and would produce a very substantial improvement by comparison with the present public transport service. Journey times would be reduced considerably.

The large modern lightweight vehicle recommended by the Consultants would provide the fast loading and unloading facilities needed for a rapid transit line and would be economical to clean and maintain. However, a vehicle of the dimensions proposed could not run over British Railways lines without some realignment of track and lineside structures. Whether the cost of carrying out any necessary work to any British Railways lines over which the rapid transit services might operate in future would be outweighed by the advantages of the larger vehicle has not been clearly demonstrated at this stage. The Working Party feel that any final decision, particularly as to the overall dimensions of the vehicle, should be left to a later stage in the study.

The Working Party accept the recommendations of the Consultants regarding the signal system and the traction power system. The signal system recommended, which would enable trains to be operated automatically, is the most up-to-date available, the most economical from the point of view of operation and maintenance, and provides the highest degree of safety and control. The traction power system proposed is 750 volts d.c. third rail. This is the system adopted on the majority of rapid transit systems throughout the world.

The Consultants stress the importance of pleasant surround ­ings for both the passengers and the adjacent community. The Working Party agree with this but consider that further work will be necessary to determine a suitable balance between cost and standards to be adopted. First class design of the whole system will in any event be essential, not only for environmental reasons but to ensure its attractiveness to the travelling public. The precise location of stations and the possibility of joint Rapid Transit/ British Railways entrances and redevelopment of the surrounding areas require examination as soon as possible. It will also be necessary to consider the comprehensive system of feeder bus routes which would be required to provide maximum accessibility to the line.

6 CONCLUSIONS

It is clear that the recommended line has the potential to provide greatly improved services, insulated from the effects of growing road congestion and, indeed, offering a check to the growth of such congestion by the attractiveness of the service to those who might otherwise travel by car. In view of this, the Working Party consider that the next stage of preparation for the construction of the rapid transit system should be pressed forward immediately on the basis proposed by the Consultants so that the recommended line could be brought into operation at the earliest practicable date.

9

7 RECOM ME NDATIONS

1. The Working Party recommend that Consultants be

retained:

(a)

(b)

(c)

To carry out functional planning of alignment, station layout and operational methods to the extent necessary to determine land requirements for purposes of a Parliamentary Bill, and to prepare detailed estimates of demand, revenue, capital requirements and operating costs for use in economic analysis and financial evaluation of the project;

To prepare specific plans, sections and cost estimates for incorporation in a private Bill seeking Parliamentary powers to construct the rapid transit line ;

To carry out functional planning to the extent necessary to identify the line of route which would be followed by any later extension to Wythenshawe, Middleton or Heald Green and to provide local authorities with information necessary to preserve the right-of-way for future rapid transit use.

2. That any contract entered into with the Consultants as a result of recommendation 1 should be subject 'to review and termination when the results of the SELN EC Trans­portation Study become available about April, 1969.

3. That work be put in hand by the Ministry of Transport and the City Council jointly, to prepare a full financial and cost ­benefit appraisal, in order to enable a final decision on construction to be made, and Ministry approval for grant purposes to be sought.

4. That the further work in connection with the study be carried out according to a time scale which would permit the Parliamentary Bill to be deposited in the 1969/70 Session.

5. That further consideration be given, in the light of the SELNEC Transportation Study results, to measures which might be taken to improve the standards of rail service for the conurbation, and to enable maximum benefit to be drawn from the first stage of the rapid transit line, by the upgrading of certain existing British Railways services.

11

(

•

SPECIAL CONSULTANTS

Geological Consultant

Dr. F. T. Howell, Ph.D ., M .Sc., A.l.Min.E., F.G.S.,

(Lecturer, University of Manchester Institute of Science & Technology)

Tunnelling Consultant

Sir Harold Harding, B.Sc., F.C.G.I., D.l.C., F.l.C.E.

Vehicle Consultant

L. W. Bardsley, B.Sc., B.Eng., S.M .l.E.E.E., P.Eng.

Contents Contents

Section 1 Page

Summary-Conclusions and Section 5 Features of Recommended Service

Recommendations 5.1 Introduction 63

1.1 Background 25 5.2 Vehicle 63

1.2 General Approach 25 5.3 Capacity and Service 65

1.3 The Report 25 5.4 Civil Engineering 67

1.4 Major Conclusions 27 5.5 Signals and Communications 81

1.5 Recommendations 29 5.6 Power Supply 85

5.7 Stations 89

Section 2 Purpose and Scope of Study 5.8 Administration 97

2.1 Purpose 33

2.2 The Study Area and Routes Investigated 33 Section 6 Capital and Operating Costs

2.3 Scope 33 6.1 Capital Cost 101

2.4 Study Programme 37 6.2 Staged Construction 101

6.3 Annual Debt Charges 101

Section 3 Travel Demand Studies 6.4 Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs 102

3.1 Introduction 41 6.5 Combined Annual and Capital Costs 102

3.2 Corridors of Heaviest Flow 41

3.3 The Significant Corridors 41 Section 7 Revenue and Other Benefits

3.4 Traffic Analysis of Alternative Routes 43 7.1 Revenue 105

3.5 Selected Route 43 7.2 Benefits 105

3.6 Detailed Assignments 43

3.7 Traffic Diversion Technique 45 Section 8 Programme for Future Action

8.1 The Overall Programme 109

Section 4 Selection of Recommended Route 8.2 Stage Ill 109

4.1 Introduction 49 8.3 Design and Preparation of

4.2 Alternatives considered 49 Contract Documents 109

4.3 Location through the Central Area 49 8.4 Construction 109

4.4 The Ringway Corridor 49 8.5 Metrication 110

4.5 The Sale-Altrincham Corridor 53

4.6 Service to Middleton and Langley 54

4.7 Service to Prestwich and Bury 55

4.8 Service to Rochdale 55

4.9 Comparison of Alternatives 55

4.10 The Recommended Lines 57

18 19

Figures Index Tables Index

Page Page

1.1 Possible Overall Network-Rapid Transit 1.1 Principal corridors of movement 27

and Suburban Rail 26 1.2 Comparison of financial results 29

1.2 Recommended Route 28 3.1 Principal corridors of movement 41

2.1 Alternative Routes Studied 35 3.2 Preliminary assignment to lines in selected corridors 41

2.2 Study Programme 36 3.3 Traffic estimates-alternative routes 43

3.1 Peak Hour Passenger Flow Diagram 42 3.4 Traffic assignments 43

3.2 Traffic Demand-Diversion Curves 44 3.5 Station loading- Northenden

4.1 Recommended Route 48 to Higher Blackley 44

4.2 Alternative Routes Studied 51 3.6 Station loading-Northenden and

4.3 Peak Hour Demand Flows 52 East Didsbury to Higher Blackley 44

4.4 Recommended Route with Bus and

3.7 Overall Results-Ringway to Langley Corridor 45

Rail Connections 58

5.1 Montage of Transit Vehicles 62 4.5.1 Comparison of alternative schemes to

serve the Altrincham Corridor 54

5.2 Proposed Vehicle Layout 64 4.9.1 Land use developments 55

5.3 Recommended Route Showing Attitude 66 4.9.2 Comparison of demand for rapid transit

5.4 Soil Borings and Geological Profile 68 service to the central area 56

5.5 Station Locations In Central Area 70 4.9.3 Comparison of journey times to Royal

Exchange Manchester by present

5.6 Profile Through Central Area 72-73 modes and by rapid transit 56

5.7 Elevated Sections 75 4.9.4 Cost comparison for rapid transit service 56

5.8 Cut-and-cover, and Earthworks 76 5.3.1 Theroretical capacity of rapid transit line 65

5.9 Tunnel Sections 77 5.3.2 Details of services on recommended route 67

5.10 Block Schematic of Automatic Train 5.3.3 Running time in minutes from Market Street 67

Operation 82 5.4.1 Comparison between cut -and -cover and

5.11 Schematic of Telecommunications System 84 tunnelling methods of construction 71

5.12 Proposed Primary Power Supply 6.1 Summary of capital costs 101

Distribution Scheme 86 6.2 Capital cost of staged construct ion 101

5.13 Schematic Layout of a Cut-and -cover

Station 90- 91 6.3 Annuity factors 101

5.14 Schematic Layout of an Elevated Station 92- 93 6.4 Annual operating and maintenance costs 102

5.15 Proposed Administrative Organisation 96 7.1 Comparison of financial results 105

8.1 Programme for Planning and Construction 108 8.1 Capital expenditure programme 110

20

21

..

SUMMARY-CONCLUSIONS

AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Section one

Summary- Conclusions and Recommendations

1.1 BACKGROUND

As a result of the recommendations arising from Stage I of the Manchester Rapid Transit Study, the Corporation of Manchester and the Ministry of Transport decided to reta in the Consultants to undertake Stage II. Commencing in March 1968, the study-the subject of this report-had the broad objectives of defining the first part of the rapid t ransit system to be developed, on the basis of demand and operational investigations, and to evolve design standards for ra pid transit construction in the Manchester area. A pro­gramme for planning and construction to permit operation of the service to begin by the earliest possible date was also prepared.

In carrying out this study the Consultants have drawn upon the results of Stage I* as well as their work in the Rail Planning Study conducted for the South -east Lancashire North-east Cheshire Transportation Study (The region is commonly termed the SELNEC Area). Findings of the rail study are to be published as Technical Working Paper No. 2. The Working Party for Stage I, consisting of representatives of Manchester Corporation, the Ministry of Transport and British Railways continued supervision of the work of the Consultants in Stage II. The Consultants met with the group at regular intervals to discuss progress and plans for on ­going work.

1.2 GENERAL APPROACH

The study was mainly directed at means of improving public transport between the urban areas in the conurbation and the Central Area, where rapid transit can be of maximum benefit. In defining the first priority for rapid transit service

· a number of alternative routes were investigated and a possible overall rapid transit network for the conurbation was produced . This was based on an ana lysis of present travel demand in the principal corridors of movement in the conurbation as derived from the SELNEC Home Interview Survey conducted in 1966, and a review of the results of the SELNEC Rail Planning Study. The lines in this network vvere then evaluated and compared to determine wh ich part of the network should be developed first as related to land use, present travel demand, public t ransport service, capita l and operating costs, and physical considerations.

The question of serving the principal corridors of travel demand is an important one, particularly when consideration

* Volume 1 : Report of the Working Party, September, 1967. The Ministry of Transport, Manchester Corporation, British Railways. Price : £2 2s. Od .

Volume 2 : Study of Rapid Transit Systems and Concepts, August, 1967. De Leuw Cather & Partners-Hennessey Chadwick 0 hEocha & Partners. Price: £3 3s. Od.

These volumes are avai lable from M anchester City Tra nsport.

is given to traffic congestion and the resulting quality of bus operations in these corridors and the very limited possibilities of making service improvements of real significance. As stated in the Report of the Working Party on Stage I of the Manchester Rapid Transit Study:

As bus services get less reliable and as more people come to own cars, more will want to use them for the journey to work. But future increases in road capacity over the next few years will be fully taken up by the anticipated growth of business and industrial traffic. Even in the long term the space that can be provided for roads and parking, while preserving the character of the city centre, will not allow more than 25-30% of people to commute by car.

As car ownership grows, as industry in the centre is replaced by offices and as new residential areas are developed at greater distances from the centre, the commuter of the future will demand and will deserve public passenger transport services of higher standards of comfort, convenience and speed. If these are not provided the future prosperity of Central Manchester as a regional centre of employment will decline.

Another aspect considered was the ph ilosophy that intro­duction of a rapid transit operation should provide service of high quality where none exists at present, rather than physically and geographically replacing existing suburban rail lines-particularly since many of these have been sh0wn in the SELNEC Rail Planning Study to be capable of handling much heavier volumes than they do today with comparatively small injections of capital. Other factors that had to be taken into account are compatibility with present and future land uses in the conurbation, and opportunities for providing adequate pedestrian, feeder bus and parking facilities at stations.

A recommended plan of action was then prepared defining the steps necessary to obtain statutory approvals and carry out design and construction so that operation of the first line could begin at the earliest possible date.

In addition, design criteria were developed so that Stage II I, consisting of functional planning and preparation of a Parliamentary Bill , cou ld start without delay.

1.3 THE REPORT

The balance of the Summary presents the major conclusions and recommendations arising out of the study. Section 2 discusses its purpose and scope and also makes reference to data used and the sources. The estimates of travel demand are contained in Section 3, and the diversion techniqu e employed is described . It is pointed out that the estimates are based on present t rip patterns in the conurbation and no

25

forecasts of future trips have been made. Section 4 starts with a description of the lines considered; these are then evaluated and compared on the basis of traffic, cost and various operating considerations, leading to selection of the route recommended as the first priority. In Section 5 aspects of the recommended service for this line are presented, including features of the vehicle, capacity and operation of the service, civil engineering considerations, stations, signals and communications, and power supply. Section 6 is a detailed description of the capital and operating costs for the service, while revenues and other benefits that will accrue are contained in Section 7. Finally, Section 8 presents a recommended programme of action to be followed in introducing rapid transit service into the conurbation.

1.4 MAJOR CONCLUSIONS

(a) The principal corridors of movement in the Study Area, listed in order of the magnitude of travel volume, are as fo llows :

TABLE 1.1 PRINCIPAL CORRIDORS OF MOVEMENT

CORRIDOR

Central Area and : 1. Wythenshawe-Ringway 2. Sale-Altrincham

MORNING PEAK PERIOD TRIPS BY ALL MODES

TO CENTRAL AREA

26,500 18,500

3. Higher Blackley-Middleton-Langley

4. Stockport 5. Ashton -under- Lyne 6. Prestwich-Bury 7. Salford-Eccles 8. Bolton 9. Oldham

15,000 14,000 11,500

9,500 6,500 6,000 5,000

The major corridors between the Central Area and Wythen ­shawe-Ringway and Higher Blackley-Langley are the only ones not served by existing railway lines. In the other corridors, most of the existing railway lines can be improved to provide a higher level of public transport service than they do today. However, these improvements would not be effective unless accompanied by improved transfer facilities between the stations in Manchester Central Area and the main shopping, business and commercial areas which, for the most part, are not within acceptable walking distance of the rai lway stations.

A possible overall network of rapid transit and suburban rail services for the conurbat ion is shown in Figure 1.1 .

(b) Clearly the optimum route for a rapid transit line through the Central Area is University Precinct- Oxford Road- St. Peter's Square - Cross Street - Corporation Street -Victoria Station. Of all possible alignments through the Centra l Area, this one would best serve the major existing land use developments and those ant icipated in the future. In add ition, this route is the best one to complement existing or improved British Railways services in the conurbat ion. Thus the Central Area would be made much more accessible to the conurbation as a whole by providing the opportunity

for railway passengers to transfer at Oxford Road and Victoria stations and to use the rapid transit line as a distribution system within the Central Area. It has been estimated that approximately 5,000 British Railways passengers would transfer to rapid transit at Oxford Road and Victoria stations. The British Railways services which would receive the greatest benefit in this situation would be:

Altrincham line

Stockport-Wilmslow line

Styal line

Bury line

Other suburban rail services in the conurbation would also benefit.

(c) The best route in terms of present and future develop­ment, passenger potential and public transport improvements and their costs is the one between Northenden and Higher fJ Blackley with a branch to East Didsbury, a total of 11 miles. At least one third of all peak period trips to and from the Central Area are generated in this corridor. The other areas in the conurbation would ~lso benefit from this route by virtue of its function as a Central Area distribution system I\ for existing or improved suburban rail services. From Northenden the route would serve Withington, University \ Precinct, Oxford Road Railway Station, St. Peter's Square, Victoria Railway Station, Collyhurst, Harpurhey, and terminate at Victoria Avenue. It would be the priority for a rapid transit network for the conurbation, and is shown in Figure 1 .2. ! The branch to East Didsbury is on the service connection • to the yard at Heaton Mersey, the only site so far confirmed f as being available for this purpose. J

(d) The total capital cost for this first part of a rapid transit network would be of the order of £50,000,000, and annual operating maintenance and debt charges would be about £4,700,000. Total annual traffic, based on present demand only, would be about 76,000,000 trips. If a fare level of threepence per passenger mile is applied, the annual deficit would amount to approximately £600,000. Alternatively a break-even cost situation could be realised at a fare of 3·5d per passenger mile. This, however, assumes no grant from Central Government funds toward the capital cost of the project. If the project qualified for a 75% grant on capital costs from the Ministry of Transport, then an annual surplus of about £1 ,800,000 could be realised at a fare level of threepence per mile.

(e) On the basis of traffic and financial estimates so far developed, the rapid transit line proposed appears likely to be financially sound at realistic fare levels and with appro ­priate grant assistance. The total benefits appear to justify the total investment.

It should be noted that the traffic and revenue estimates could vary by as much as 20% above or below the figures as shown above. This is due · to the degree of statistical reliability of the home interview sample size and the possible range in value of the factors used to derive the proportion of total trips which could be allocated to rapid transit vis-a-vis some other mode. But even if a lower estimate is used, which allows for a 20% reduction in demand, a fare level of about 2d per mile would cover debt charges and operating cost, assuming a 75% grant can be obtained towards the capital cost.

A comparison of financial results is shown in Table 1.2.

27

(d) Oxford Road station should be built using the cut -and­

cover method due to its proximity to the West Manchester

Fault.

(e) On the basis of available information the balance of the

underground link through the Central Area of Manchester

should be constructed as a bored tunnel rather than by the cut-and-cover method.

(f) The design standards for functional planning of rapid

transit in the conurbation, as described generally in Section 5

of the report and submitted in detail to the Working Party,

should be adopted.

(g) Consideration should be given as soon as possible to

investigating, with British Railways, the potential for

suburban rail service improvements in the conurbation . At

the present time it appears that the Altrincham, Bury and

Stockport lines are the best prospects in terms of maximum

benefit to passengers from construction of the Central Area

Rapid Transit Line. The SELN EC Study will report more

fully on this question.

30

(h) To make it practicable for rapid transit to be operating in

the conurbation by the end of 1973, functional planning

of the route and the preparation of plans and documents for

submission of a Parliamentary Bill should begin immediately.

This would allow a decision to be made in mid -1969, when

the SELN EC Study results will be available, on the sub­

mission of the Bill in November 1969, with a view to

receiving assent in the summer of 1970. This work would

form Stage 111 of the Manchester Rapid Transit Study.

(i) Functional planning in Stage Ill should include examina­

tion of the following promising future extensions to rapid

transit service:

Northenden to Wythenshawe

Higher Blackley to Middleton

East Didsbury to Heald Green.

Functional planning carried out at this time will ensure that

right-of-way can be protected for these extensions.

PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY

2.1 PURPOSE

The basic purpose of this study has been to define the general location and extent of the first line for a rapid transit system in the SELN EC area. Associated objectives have been:

a. To determine whether the project is financially viable and would warrant functional planning leading eventually to approval to introduce rapid transit service;

b. To establish planning and design standards to enable functional planning for the recommended route to proceed with a minimum of delay;

c. To prepare an orderly programme of action to enable the first section of route to be approved, designed, constructed and put into operation at the earliest time possible, consistent with sound administrative practices and the financial resources available.

2.2 THE STUDY AREA AND ROUTES INVESTIGATED

The area studied is defined as the South-east Lancashire North-east Cheshire (SELNEC) Area . Particular emphasis was placed on the Central Area of Manchester, the scene of greatest traffic congestion now and for the forseeable future, and the location where development of a rapid transit system would bring the greatest transportation benefits to the entire conurbation.

The alternative routes investigated consisted of lines which emerged from the SELNEC Rail Planning Study (Technical Working Paper No. 2) as being the most promising prospects for rapid transit service in the conurbation, considering present land use development and any major changes considered likely in the future. These potential routes were based on the professional opinion and judgment of the Consultants and the senior officials principally concerned with land use and with the planning and operation of transport services in the conurbation . The lines are shown in Figure 2.1 and are described in some detail in Section 4.

2.3 SCOPE

Matters investigated in the course of this study include :

Land Use and Travel Demand

Route Location and Engineering Feasibility

Cost and Revenue Estimates

Engineering Standards

Programme for Future Action

The basic information used in the investigation and the scope of the analysis is described as follows.

Section two

Purpose and Scope of Study

2.3.1 Land Use and Travel Demand

The data were derived mainly from the SELNEC Trans ­portation Study inventories of land use and travel patterns and volumes in 1966. Possible patterns of future land use development throughout the conurbation were also taken into account. For example, reference was made to Manchester City Centre Map 1967 (Draft). Basically, however, travel estimates have been based on present trip patterns in the major transportation corridors orientated to the Central Area. These estimates are considered satisfactory for the purposes of this study, where the main requirement has been to obtain an assessment of gross volumes, in terms of potential passengers per hour, to reflect the relative impor­tance and the requirement, if any, for rapid transit service of each corridor.

2.3.2 Route Location and Engineering Feasibility

The data used included maps, plans and information available from the local authorities and the SELN EC Transportation Study on present and future road systems, public transport and other public services. A preliminary soils and geological investigation was also undertaken to locate rock and confirm its quality through the Central Area between the University and Collyhurst.

The route location and engineering studies were carried out in sufficient detail to confirm the feasibility of building a rapid transit line through the corridor which, on the basis of present land use and travel demand and of future land use development, was considered to be the best route for the first part of a rapid transit system. These studies were not carried far enough to define property requirements as this would have been premature in the present stage of rapid transit planning. Detailed information on property would be produced as part of the results of Stage 111 of the Manchester Rapid Transit Study, described in Section 8.

2.3.3 Cost and Revenue Estimates

The cost estimates for fixed facilities, property and operating expenses have been derived from unit costs developed in Stage I of the Manchester Rapid Transit Study and the SELNEC Rail Planning Study. The figures have been adjusted to reflect labour and material costs in 1968. Revenue estimates have been based on the estimate of travel demand, the daily travel figures being converted to annual figures by reference to the operating statistics of Manchester City Transport.

The cost and revenue estimates are sufficiently accurate to reflect differences between alternative routes. They are also realistic in terms of producing order-of -magnitude costs to build and operate the routes evaluated and the likely annual

33

I

-I I

I •

Key to Figure 2.1

ALTERNATIVE ROUTES STUDIED

No. Miles

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Ringway route, as used for systems evaluation in Manchester 10·4 Rapid Transit Study, Stage I

Ringway route, via British Railways Styal line 12·5

Branch to East Didsbury and Heaton Mersey yard 1 ·7

Extension to Heald Green 3·2

Altrincham route, via Moss Side 9·7

Middleton- Langley route 5·7

Prestwich-Bury route, via existing British Railways line 10·2

Rochdale route, via existing British Railways line 10·5

2.2

.,,

~ ~

b

0

• " ~ ~ ~

-~ , ·~ -. ! 1

0

~ ~ ~

~ .0

~ 1; ~

! ii ~ .

' • ·~ ~ <l' a:

---------- ---------------·'=-~'},,,,o:::;:;;=;;;;;;;~=='--_J

l · ~----------------"'(~'4----------~ ~

. ~ E

----:": v-- ~

j ~ 0 ~

~-----; ~ - \ .,/',,... I --?<""-

,./ /

~

~ "' ~ ~ ~ " ~ • " ~~

§ ~

·1 ~ ' ~ • t) -~ .:; ~ s

.:;

" ~ ~ "' ----"

t i ! ~

" ~

~

" ~ !'.)

~ 0

~ ~ ~

~ ~ I

36

.,;

"' - ;;:;ti 0

., c-

- rt) 0 0

"'" "'u 0

., . -f\li:;

0 ...

-~ i ti

"'"' f\I & I.I'}~

"' & "' . ~ "' . "' 0 ..,..,

f\I~

"' "'"' f\I t >!>

N~

0"'

"'~ "

~i

"' ~"' ~

... !!? -~

~~

"' I ~~

.; -. "' -~

- ~ ~ . -~ i J:: ~

-~ i "' . "' _.,, ~ ...

- ., ~ : ~ _,_ ~

"' '" ,<o !;'

"' <o

"' _,,, ~

"

i• !!? .. " !)!

F "' -:t "' -"' ~

w ~ ~ <( a: (.!)

0 a: 0..

> c ::> I-tJ)

surplus or deficit at various fare levels. Therefore the resu lts can be used to reach conclusions as to the first priority for rapi d transit construction and the order of economic return on any major investment.

2.3.4 Engineering Standards and Criteria

These have been evolved in sufficient detail to permit functional planning of the recommended route to proceed immediately on approval of Stage 111 of the Manchester Rapid Transit Study. In Stage 111 the standards cou ld then be applied to determine details of property requirements and to develop accurate cost estimates for the entire scheme.

The topics are related to the following aspects of system

design:

a. Vehicle Design

b. Civil Engineering

c. Structural Engineering

d. Public Services

e. Mechanical Services

f. Power Supply and Electrical Services

g. Signals, Train Control and Communications

h. Station, Feeder Bus, Parking and Fare Collection Facilities.

The standards and criteria recommended for adoption are

based on an assessment of current technology and an eva luation of modern rapid transit planning and operating practice in the United Kingdom and elsewhere.

2.3.5 Programme for Future Action

This has been prepared against the background of the legis lative and engineering requirements for design and approval of the project and on the basis that the preparatory work should be conducted on a time scale which would permit the service to be introduced at the earliest possible date. Reference has been made to the Standing Orders of the House of Commons respecting Private Bills, and discussions have taken place with officials in the Corporation and the Ministry of Transport.

The information presented is definitive with regard to the next stage of the study programme, which would lead to approval by Parliament, the Ministry of Transport and the local authorities to construct and operate rapid transit. The programme also describes subsequent stages of the process, but in more general terms.

2.4 STUDY PROGRAMME

Figure 2.2 illustrates the general procedure followed throughout the course of the study. The work programme was designed to meet the requirements of the Terms of Reference to the Consultants.

37

(

TRAVEL DEMAND STUDIES

(

• t '

.. ..

3.1 INTRODUCTION

The travel estimates have been produced from the results of the SELNEC Transportation Study Home Interview Survey, conducted in 1966. The estimates are preliminary only at this stage, as the full analysis of traffic assignment data, for the SE LNEC area as a whole, will not be available until early in 1969 when alternative broad transportation systems will have been examined from the output of the mathematical model now being developed. Therefore, the estimates presented herein are subject to the findings of the Trans­portation Study as a whole. Nevertheless, it is considered that this investigation has produced travel estimates sufficiently sound to provide a firm basis for the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report.

It is emphasised that the estimates are based entirely on trip patterns and volumes that existed in 1966. No attempt has been made to forecast trips in the future, nor has any allowance been made for the fact that construction of a rapid transit line generates additional trips, either new trips not previously made by any mode of travel or trips which before were destined to other parts of the area. In using these estimates the effects of proposed land use changes have been taken into account in evaluating the alternative routes for passenger potential. These changes could only be quantified very approximately in the study and more accurate estimates of their effects on travel demand will be produced from the SELN EC Transportation Study in 1969.

3.2 CORRIDORS OF HEAVIEST FLOW

A ra pid transit operation is at its most efficient when serving high-density, peak movements passing daily along travel corridors orientated to a city centre. The first task, therefore, was to examine travel patterns in the conurbation and identify the Central Area corridors containing the heaviest f lows in the morning peak period of travel (7 -00 a.m. to 9-00 a.m.) . This was done by reference to the tables showing tota l trips by all modes based on the 36 SELN EC sectors and to sector-centroid network assignments. Table 3.1 shows the principal travel corridors in the conurbation ranked by volume of trips with destinations inside the Central Area .

To explore the situation further the flow plans produced from the analysis were re -plotted using a new set of corridors located midway between those initially identified. This made it possi ble to evaluate what opportunity there might be for a rapid transit line located in a given corridor to attract trips from adjacent ones.

Section three

Travel Demand Studies

TABLE 3.1 PRINCIPAL CORRIDORS OF MOVEMENT

CORRIDOR

Central Area and : 1. Wythenshawe-Ringway 2. Sale- Altrincham 3. Higher Blackley-M iddleton-

Langley 4. Stockport 5. Ashton -under-Lyne 6. Prestwich-Bury 7. Salford- Eccles 8. Bolton 9. Oldham

MORNING PEAK PERIOD TRIPS

BY ALL MODES TO CENTRAL AREA

26,500 18,500

15,000 14,000 11,500

9,500 6,500 6,000 5,000

3.3 THE SIGNIFICANT CORRIDORS

The results of the above assessment were related to the finding of other phases of the study and the SELNEC Rail Planning Study (Technical Working Paper No. 2). It was concluded that six rapid transit alignments should be examined for potential in serving Central Area corridor movements. The lines in question were plotted on the corridor flow maps, and using judgement a preliminary assignment was made to each independently. In this analysis, however, trips moving towards and through the Central Area were taken into consideration, in addition to those ending there. Using factors derived from the pre ­liminary results of the SELN EC Transportation Study Home Interview Survey, the estimates were converted from the morning peak period to the peak hour of travel. The results are summarised in Table 3.2.

TABLE 3.2 PRELIMINARY ASSIGNMENT TO LINES IN SELECTED

CORRIDORS

LINE TO CENTRAL AREA

1. Ringway 2. Altrincham 3. Chead le Heath 4. Langley 5. Bury 6. Rochdale

ESTIMATED RAPID TRANSIT TRIPS IN PEAK HOUR

24,000 23,500 21,700 12,400

8,000 4,300

These results ind icate four significant corridors serving the Central Area: from Ringway, Altrincham and Cheadle Heath to the south of it, and from Langley to the north.

41

However, while the Cheadle Heath line shows a high volume it was found that some 80% of the trips could be attracted to a line in the Ringway corridor. Consequently, the Ringway, Altrincham and Langley corridors were selected for investi­gation in some detail. When these investigations had been completed the results were combined with data on the Bury and Rochdale lines-as summarised in Table 3.2-and a peak hour passenger flow diagram prepared. This is Figure 3.1.

3.4 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVE ROUTES

Using a diversion formula developed for this study (see Section 3.7) detailed traffic assignments were made to these routes:

(a) Ringway to Langley

(b) Altrincham to Langley

(c) A combination of (a) and (b)

As a basis for evaluation of the alternatives, estimates were made of total passenger trips, the maximum passenger load in the peak direction of travel (towards the Central Area in the morning) and total trip miles. The maximum load is obtained from inspection of the one-hour passenger volumes moving between all pairs of adjacent stations in the peak direction of travel. The estimates were converted to ann·ual amounts by using statistics of Manchester City Transport. Table 3.3 summarises the results.

3.5 SELECTED ROUTE

The alternative routes were also evaluated in other respects in parallel phases of the study. Included were assessments of future changes in land use, presence of other rail facilities, operational and physical feasibility, and capital and annual costs. As a result, the route selected was one located in the Ringway-Langley corridor, with a possibility of its making use of sections of the Styal railway line. This selected route was then studied in depth by analysing:

(a) The effect on travel demand of reducing the length of the rapid transit line {this was to assist in the process of selecting suitable terminals) ;

{b) The pattern of 'on' and 'off' movements at each station.

3.6 DETAILED ASSIGNMENTS

Table 3.4 illustrates the effect on traffic of eliminating outlying stations. For example, the maximum peak hour load with terminal stations at Ringway and Langley is 22,000 passengers. If the northern terminal remains at Langley, but the southern terminal moves to Northenden, the maximum load falls to 18,000 passengers. Table 3.5 lists the number of passengers joining and leaving trains at the various stations between Northenden and Higher Blackley during the peak hour. Table 3.6 shows the same for Northenden and Higher Blackley with a branch to East Didsbury.

TABLE 3.3

ROUTE

Ringway-Langley Altrincham-Langley Ringway and Altrincham-Langley

TERMINAL STATION

South North

Ringway Langley Higher Blackley Moston Lane Victoria

Wythenshawe Langley Higher Blackley Moston Lane Victoria

Northenden Langley Higher Blackley Moston Lane Victoria

Barlow Moor Langley Higher Blackley Moston Lane Victoria

Northenden and East Didsbury Higher Blackley

Victoria

TRAFFIC ESTIMATES-ALTERNATIVE ROUTES

PEAK HOUR PASSENGERS

Max. Load Peak Direction

22,000 19,200 34,100

Total Trips

48,600 44,000 80,200

TABLE 3.4 TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENTS Ringway to Langley Route

PEAK HOUR PASSENGERS

Max. Load Total Peak Direction Trips

22,000 48,600 21,900 46,800 21,800 46,000 21,300 32,000

20,000 46,200 20,000 45,200 19,900 44,200 19.400 31,000

18,000 44,000 18,000 42,900 17,900 42,200 17.400 30,000

16,800 42,500 16,700 40,500 16,600 39,000 16, 100 28,900

20,000 45,100 19,400 32,100

ANNUAL PASSENGERS

Total Trips

81,700,000 73,900,000

134,600,000

ANNUAL

Total Trips

81,700,000 78,600,000 77,300,000 53,800,000

77,600,000 75,900,000 74,300,000 52,100,000

73,900,000 72,100,000 71,000,000 50,000,000

71.400,000 68,000,000 65,500,000 47,600,000

75,800,000 53,500,000

Total Trip Miles

398,000,000 366,000,000 658,000,000

PASSENGERS

Total Trip Miles

398,000,000 364,000,000 343,000,000 242,000,000

357,000,000 327,000,000 305,000,000 209,000,000

333,000,000 310,000,000 291,000,000 194,000,000

285,000,000 256,000,000 235,000,000 162,000,000

323,000,000 209,000,000

43

TABLE 3.5

STATION LOADING

PEAK HOUR PASSENGERS

Northenden to Higher Blackley

STATION

Northenden

Barlow Moor

Withington

Platt Lane

Whitworth Park

University

Oxford Street

St. Peter's Square

Market Street

Vi ctor ia

Collyhurst

Queen's Park

Maston Lane

Higher Blackley

3.2

0 0 JO

ON OFF

12,450 1,900

2,500 400

2,600 150

4,250 400

1,650 2,200

550 2,600

1,200 7,250

1,200 7,150

1,800 10,950

650 3,600

900 2,550

2,500 600

2,650 1,550

8,000 1,600

42,900 42,900

20 30 4 0

PERCENT ASSIG NMENT (P)

44

TABLE 3 .6

STATION LOADING

PEAK HOUR PASSENGERS

Northenden and East Didsbury to Higher Blackley

TOTAL STATION ON OFF TOTAL

14,350 East Didsbury 3,000 250 3,250

2,900 Northenden 11,700 1,900 13,600

2,750 Barlow Moor 2,450 350 2,800

Withington 2,450 350 2,800 4,650

Platt Lane 4,250 400 4,650 3,850

Whitworth Park 1,650 2,300 3,950 3,150

University 550 2,700 3,250 8,450

Oxford Street 1,200 7,500 8,700 8,350

St. Peter's Square 1,200 7,700 8,900 12,750

Market Street 1,800 11 ,600 13,400

4,250 Victoria 650 3,700 4,350

3,450 Collyhurst 1,000 2,550 3,550

3, 100 Queen 's Park 2,500 600 3,100

4,200 Maston Lane 2,700 1,600 4,300

9,600 Higher Blackley 8,000 1,600 9,600 - - - --85,800 45,100 45,100 90,200

r2 C\J _J

II Cl

0 JO 0:::

I-z w

9 u w z

8 0 N

0 I-

7 w z ::i

6 !::: Cf)

z 5 <!

0::: I-

Cl 4 Cl.

<! 0:::

3 :::2: 0 0::: LL

2 w u z <! I-Cf)

Ci

50 60 70 100 R = J/2

lo IJo 150 lso IJ OO I R = 3/4 J

TRAFFIC DEMAND- DIVERSIO N CURV ES

3.7 TRAFFIC DIVERSION TECHNIQUE

The diversion formu la developed for this study is :

p = 100 ( 1 _ L2 + RL3 )

1 - R y L 2+ L 2 2 3

w here : P is the percentage of trips diverted from present modes;

R is the ratio of present mode speed to rapid transit speed ;

L2 is the total distance travelled between zone centroids and the rapid transit line ;

L3 is the distance travelled along the rapid transit line.

It was assumed that R would have a value oft for existing public transport trips (bus and suburban rail), and & for tr ips by motor car. Thus public transport trips would be more likely to be diverted to rapid transit. A family of curves derived from the formula is shown in Figure 3.2 . Taking each mode separately, the formula was applied to interzonal tabu lations of home to work trips in the morning peak period of travel. The results were factored to obtain the number of trips made for .all purposes by each mode. In

treating car driver trips an additiona l factor was used to account for passengers in the vehicle . The last step in the process was to convert the results from the peak period to peak hour of travel. Al l factors were based on preliminary results of th e SELNEC Transportation Study Home Interview

Survey.

Table 3.7 illustrates the overall results obtained within the corridor from applying the diversion technique to a line

between Ringway and Langley.

TABLE 3.7

OVERALL RESULTS- RINGWAY TO LANGLEY CORRIDOR

ALL BUS CAR RAIL TRIPS TRIPS TRIPS TRIPS

Per cent of Corridor Trips assigned to Line 46 52 33 33

Per cent of Total On-Line Trips 100 76 17 7

It should be noted that the traffic estimate given in this section could vary by as much as 20 per cent because of sampling re liability in the home interview survey and possible range in values of diversion technique factors.

45

(

SELECTION OF RECOMMENDED ROUTE

Section four

Selection of Recommended Route

4.1 INTRODUCTION

A number of potential rapid transit routes emerged from an

inspection of the travel demand information for the study

area and from the SELN EC Rail Planning Study. Over the

long term these could form a network of new rapid transit

services for the conurbation.

Concurrently with the travel demand studies described in the

previous section, the potential routes were also being

evaluated on the basis of other considerations in order to

determine which line should be recommended as the first

priority for introducing rapid transit service in the area. The

factors taken into account were:

Present and future land use;

Present travel demand and future potential;

Accessibility and convenience for pedestrians, feeder bus

passengers and car users;

Inter-connection with other transport facilities;

The present quality and potential for improvement of bus

and rail services;

Journey times;

Capital and operating costs.

The routes were first assessed against the background of the

particular corridors they served to identify the basic elements

of a possible rapid transit network for the conurbation. When

this network had been described, a study was made to

determine which part of it should be considered as the first priority for introduction of rapid transit services.

4.2 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED

The principal routes of greatest traffic potential are those between the Central Area and :

Ringway, via Wythenshawe; Altrincham, via Sale; Langley, via Middleton.

In corridors of less intensive demand for rapid transit

service there is potential for routes between the Central

Area and:

Bury, via Prestwich;

Rochdale; ·

Cheadle Heath or Heald Green.

In other corridors it is evident that improved British Railways

services could adequately meet the need for public transport

at significantly less cost than construction of rapid transit

linys. Such improvements generally would take the form of

higher service frequency, new rolling stock, and upgraded

station facilities including provision for feeder buses and parking.

The corridors in question, which were not studied for rapid

transit operation, are those between the Central Area and:

Stockport-Wilmslow

Stockport-Hazel Grove

Stockport-Macclesfield

Marple

Hyde

Ashton-under- Lyne

Oldham.

4.3 LOCATION THROUGH THE CENTRAL AREA

The recommended alignment through the Central Area is

shown in Figure 4.1. This particular location would bring

passengers by rapid transit within convenient walking

distance of most of the civic, educational, business, shopping

and entertainment concentrations in the Central Area.

Similar benefits would accrue to rail users throughout the

conurbation by the use of transfer facilities to rapid transit at

the railway stations. The one main area not served, Piccadilly

Gardens, could possibly be linked by a shuttle feeder bus

service operating from St. Peter's Square station. The

recommended alignment is a feasible one from a physical

standpoint and the location has been discussed with City

officials responsible for planning the Central Area.

Another possible route through the Central Area, developed

in the course of the SELNEC Rail Planning Study, would

connect Piccadilly Station, Piccadilly Gardens and Market

Street with Victoria Station. This route deserves consideration

in the future, but it in no way matches the recommended one

in terms of proximity to the major centres of activity in the

Central Area. It is clear that the recommended route would

be the best to serve existing and planned development in the

Central Area, and thus would encourage maximum use of

rapid transit.

4.4 THE RINGWAY CORRIDOR

4.4.1 The Major Alternatives

Referring to Figure 4.2, the Ringway corridor includes two

major alternative routes. This is the principal corridor of travel

demand in the conurbation and a rapid transit line located

here would attract about 30,000 trips in both directions in

the peak hour. Alternative 1, the route to the south developed

for systems comparison in Stage I of the Manchester Rapid

Transit Study, was used for evaluation purposes. This

route passes through the University Precinct, Withington,

Northenden and Wythenshawe to reach Ringway Airport

and lies entirely on new right-of-way. Alternative 2 would

49

(

Key to Figure 4.2

ALTERNATIVE ROUTES STUDIED

No. Miles

1 Ringway route, as used for systems evaluation in Manchester 10·4 Rapid Transit Study, Stage I

2 Ringway route, via British Railways Styal line 12·5

3 Branch to East Didsbury, and Heaton Mersey yard 1 ·7

4 Extension to Heald Green 3·2

5 Altrincham route, via Moss Side 9·7

6 Middleton-Langley route 5·7

7 Prestwich-Bury route, via existing British Railways line 10·2

8 Rochdale route, via existing British Railways line 10·5

50

II

11

I: 1:

4 .3

52

<.O

0 z w (.!) w _J

I.() C\J

I.()

. , -(/)

0 (.)

spuosno4'

(/)

(,.) a. .ll:: c: 0 (.)

.s::. 0 o en u; c: c:O Cl

.g ~ .5 ... 0

~ ~ a:: 0

(.)

oPO!Jad '>f oad U! !>Jafluassod C\J ~ Q l()

I ,J I I I

~-r---.J

.__,

C\J

'i ~ \ I ,...

I I I

,J • I I

' I I

... I

I

i I I

\

UO!ll!W l al!W 'Jad 'SO:>

0

I.()

uo,sow

C\J '>fJDd s,uaano

0

co

D!JOP!/\ .,s ia~pow

·bs s,Jatad ·is poo~ PJO~XO

.<psJaA!un

uo,6U!4J!M

·ur 6u!Mdo1

l.O 'Pel JOOW MOIJD8

0

E

C\J

e >-- c I/I J:

sso~ MOPD4S

..!!! g' :i ii

I[)

(

0

- .<JnQSP!O JSD3

...:.... 0

c: E -:> e Cl - c: I/I 'i al a.

0 ::E -'

pJO)..

en s 0 ...J LL.

c 2 ~ :2: w c a: ::> 0 :I: ~ ~ w D.

leave the above al ignment at Platt Lane, proceed via the Stya l line of British Railways from Mauldeth Road to East Didsbury, and meet the original alignment at Sharston .

The route via the Styal line would cost £8,000,000 for fixed fac ilities and extra rolling stock, compared to £9,800,000 fo r the completely new route via Withington . The £8,000,000 investment in the Styal line alternative would provide service in an area which already has a railway line and has a lower passenger potential than the catchment area for the new route. The new route would be faster, being shorter by 2· 1 miles, and would serve the shopping centres of Northenden and Withington . When operation and maintenance are considered, the route via Withington wou ld have lower costs than the route via the Styal line and these savings would more than offset the extra capital outlay. Including annual debt charges as well as maintenance and operating expenses, the savings in total annual costs by adopting the Withington route, instead of the Styal line, would amount to £66,000,

It is therefore recommended that rapid transit service in the Wythenshawe-Ringway corridor be planned to follow the new alignment v ia Withington and Northenden.

The peak hour demand flows shown in Figure 4.3 for the Ringway corridor drop below acceptable rap id transit load ings at Hollyhedge Road, approximately one mile south of Northenden. The lower volumes beyond this point could be served by feeder buses operating on the relat ively uncongested and extensive road network in the area . How ever, for practical reasons Hollyhedge Road is not a

good site for a major bus/rapid transit interchange station. The extra cost of going on to Wythenshawe, the next station south, would be high (approximately £5,000,000) since the line would be built in expensive cut-and-cover construction. It was concluded that while Wythenshawe station would be a satisfactory southern terminal, the possibility of one closer to the city centre should be investi ­gated to keep costs to a minimum. Future land use changes may result in substantial increases in traffic demand from the Wythenshawe area so that a line in the Ringway corridor shou ld make provision for extension at a later date to Wythenshawe.

The line must be built as far as Barlow Moor Road in order to provide a service connection via East Didsbury to the proposed yard and workshops at Heaton Mersey, the only acceptable site found so far. However, this would not be a practicable site for the major feeder bus and parking facilit ies requ ired at the terminus of a rapid transit line, and road access would be restricted from south of the Mersey. Also, stopping the line here would result in a high cost per passenger mile of service.

Northenden would be an excellent choice for a southern terminal since it is well situated on the road system and is within feeder bus range of Hollyhedge Road and Wythenshawe.

4 .4.2 Service to Cheadle Heath or Heald Green

Two possibilities exist for branches from the Withington ­Northenden alignment. Alternative 3 on Figu re 4.2 refers to a disused portion of the British Railways line from Manchester Central to Ch inley which passes throu gh East Didsbury and

intersects the route of Alternative 1 at Lapwing Lane, West Didsbury. This line would provide a service connection to the yard and workshops necessary to operate the Northenden service. Passenger service to East Didsbury could be provided with the relatively small expenditure on fixed facil ities and rolling stock of £1,000,000 in addition to the costs involved in building the service line to the yard at Heaton Mersey.

East Didsbury is an important focal point for road traffic and would have an estimated demand of 3,000 peak hour passengers. It is also a potential interchange point with the Styal line of British Railways. Service to East Didsbury should be considered in conjunction with implementation of the Northenden line.

Consideration was also given to the desirability of con ­tinuing to Cheadle Heath, where a disused British Railways station exists. Such an extension would cost about £1,300,000 to construct, but it is considered that the relatively low demand figures at this point would not justify such an expenditure.

Another alternative (No. 4) is a connection between East Didsbury and Heald Green, using the existing right-of-way of the British Railways Styal line. Thus, rapid transit trains from the Central Area could operate to East Didsbury, Gatley and Heald Green; beyond Heald Green the present t ~affic demand does not warrant rapid transit service. The Styal line might then be abandoned north of East Didsbury and south of Heald Green, and the traffic from these areas served by feeder bus. To carry out t his proposal would require an expenditure of some £3,250,000 on fixed facilities.

It was concluded that service between East Didsbury and Heald Green was not at present an essential part of rapid t ransit operation since these areas have the benefit of existing British Railways service on the Styal line. A service to Heald Green does hold promise, however, and its merits should be considered for addition to the rapid transit network in the future, coupled with abandonment of the British Railways services on the Styal line.

4.5 TH E SALE-ALTRINCHAM CORRIDOR

There are basically two ways of serving this corridor and the Central Area . In both cases the link through the Central Area between the University Precinct and Victoria station would form an essential common feature . The alternatives are :

(a) Improved service on the existing railway line between Altrincham and Oxford Road stations. Passengers for Central Area points other than Oxford Road could t ransfer to rapid transit at this location.

(b) Rapid Transit servi ce from Altrincham to the Central Area via Moss Side (Alternative 5 on Figure 4.2). This line would follow the existing railway right -of -way from Altrincham to Warwick Road via Stretford, thence, by means of a new underground line through Moss Side, to connect with the Central Area rapid transit line at the Un iversity Precinct. Passengers would thus have a direct no -transfer route to Central Area points.

The two schemes would serve a common area betw een

53

Altrincham and Warwick Road over a distance of 5t miles. Between Warwick Road and Oxford Road, the existing railway line passes through an area of low demand at present, but serves Central Area destinations in the vicinity of the existing Knott Mill station. The rapid transit route would serve the redevelopment area in Moss Side, and the University Precinct.

The two services are compared in Table 4.5.1 below.

TABLE 4.5.1

COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVE SCHEMES TO SERVE THE ALTRINCHAM CORRIDOR

ITEM ALTERNATIVE

Length, Altrincham to Oxford Road

1. Improved British Railways Service

8 miles

Running Time, Altrincham to Oxford Road 19 mins.

Central Area Passengers in the Peak Hour 12,000

Cost for Fixed Facilities excluding Central Area Line £2,000,000

2. Rapid Transit via Moss Side

9 miles

21 mins.

19,000

£13,000,000

Typical Journey Times between Altrincham and Royal Exchange are compared below:

(a) by private car at present

(b) by rail transport at present

(c) by bus transport at present

{d) by improved British Railways service with transfer to Central Area line at Oxford Road

(e) by rapid transit through Moss Side

40 minutes

40 minutes

53 minutes

32 minutes

27 minutes

It can be seen that a new rapid transit route would handle about 7,000 additional peak hour passengers and save about five minutes journey time but would cost £11 ,000,000 more.

The five minutes saved by rapid transit results from elimination of the transfer from railway to rapid transit at Oxford Road station. Of course, not all the passengers using an improved rail service would need to transfer at Oxford Road since some would have destinations convenient to Knott Mill and Oxford Road stations. It is not expected that the five minutes transfer time and transfer inconvenience would be a major deterrent to passengers on an improved rail service when this is related to the present journey times by public transport.

Most of the additional trips by rapid transit would be generated in the Moss Side area. If rapid transit service is not provided some of these journeys could be made on the Northenden rapid transit line, if built, but most of them would have to be made by bus or car. Since the area is only one and three-quarter miles from Royal Exchange, the potential time savings are not very great and would amount to about nine minutes for a trip to Royal Exchange when compared to the present bus journey during peak periods.

A rapid t ransit line terminating in Moss Side was also considered, but this is not a sound proposition on its own.

54

Thece ;, no su;table s;te fo, a ya'd and the pasC ge' volumes generated are not adequate on their own to justify the construction of a line th rough the Central Area . In this regard the demand estimates used are probably no longer valid . The area is being redeveloped and the new residents may generate fewer Central Area trips than resid ents in the very crowded housing conditions which prevailed when th e home interview survey was carried out.

It was therefore concluded that rapid transit serving th e area between Warwick Road and Altrincham need not be considered in view of the quality of service possible at less cost by improving British Railways services, in combination with a Central Area rapid transit line. Consideration was also given to the possibility of service to Moss Side as a branch service from the Northenden line, an operation felt to have low priority. Further, the implementation at some future date of branch service and junction operation at_ this close ­in location could create serious operating problems on a Northenden line already in existence at that time.

4.6 SERVICE TO MIDDLETON AND LANGLEY

In the area north of Victoria station, the corridor with the greatest traffic potential is that serving Middleton and Langley. The line evaluated in this corridor (Alternative 6) is similar to the route developed for systems comparison in Stage I of the Manchester Rapid Transit Study.

The estimated peak hour demand for rapid transit in th is corridor is 12,400 passengers and therefore by accepted standards such service warrants consideration. As there are no existing rail lines in the corridor, new rapid transit facilities would provide the main opportunity to improve public transport. The advantages of rapid transit over th e existing bus services are exemplified by the journey from Maston to Royal Exchange, which takes 31 minutes by bus today ; this would be reduced to 17 minutes with rap id transit.

In establishing a desirable northern terminus for rap id transit in the Langley corridor, the main factors considered were the forecast peak hour passenger demand along the line, train operation requirements and the need for a major interchange from rail to bus or car. Examination of the peak hour demand indicated that there would be a sharp reduction in passengers north of Higher Blackley (Rochdale Road at Victoria Avenue) . This is in the centre of an excellent road network and adjacent to the planned Outer Ring Road. Also space is available to develop a terminal and major transfer facilities for feeder bus services and parking. A li ne terminating at Victoria Avenue would serve the important new developments at Dam Head Farm and Harpurhey.

Terminals nearer to the city would force feeder bus services and motorists from areas to the north on to Rochdale Road, south of Victoria Avenue, which is congested at present. Vacant space for terminal facilities is not available to develop a major interchange facility, except in the Harpurhey redevelopment area. Here, road traffic generated by the terminal could prove to be undesirable. Any facili ties constructed initially at a more southerly location would not have the permanency of a Victoria Avenue site, where a terminal should meet the tra vel requirements for some time into the future.

4.7 SERVICE TO PRESTWICH AND BURY

Service on the Bury line of British Railways could be improved, or the line could be made available for rapid t ransit service as an extension of the Central Area line. (See Alternative 7 in Figure 4.2) .

The corridor in which it lies has an estimated peak hour passenger demand for rapid transit of 8,000. More than half of its ten stations have good potential for park -and -ride and feeder bus facilities, but demand would fall off between Prestwich and Bury to an estimated maximum of 2,000 peak hour trips.

To improve the British Railways services and provide fast and frequent trains into Victoria, where convenient passenger interchange with the Central Area line could be provided, would cost £2,200,000 for fixed facilities . Alternatively, it wou ld be possible to connect the southern end of the line to the Central Area line. This would require an expenditure of about £5,200,000 to build the connection and modify the fixed facilities to initiate a rapid transit service to the standards contemplated.

The land use forecasts for this area indicate little potential for growth in trips to the Central Area . Thus the additional £3,000,000 to connect the Bury line to the Central Area ra pid transit line would have to be justified in terms of the time savings- about five minutes- and the improved conven ience resulting from the elimination of transfer between British Railways and rapid t ransit trains at Victoria. It is estimated that about 75 per cent of Bury line passengers w ould wish to transfer at Victoria station. The five minutes time saving is not really significant relative to the overall benefits obtained by providing Bury line railway passengers with rapid transit service to those parts of the Central Area w hich are not convenient to Victoria station.

The operation of through Bury line trains to the Central Area by means of a connection to the Central Area line is not considered to be a first priority in the programme for rap id t ransit construction in the conurbation .

4.8 SERVICE TO ROCHDALE

The estimated peak hour demand for rapid transit in the corridor along which the Rochdale route (Alternative 8) lies is just over 4,000 trips. This does not justify rapid transit services. The existing British Railways line from Victoria via Middleton Junction to Rochdale would have adequate capacity to meet the demand with an expenditure of just under £1,000,000 on improvements to track, stations and signalling . This would enable more frequent services to be provided, and in combination with the Central Area line it would afford ready means of access to the Central Area. Since the existing railway lines cannot be given over for rapid transit service major expenditures would be involved in building a line in this corridor. This would not be justified by demand. Thus the Rochdale line was not considered as part of a possible rapid transit network in the conurbation in the near future.

4.9 COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES

4.9.1 Introduction

The evaluation of each route, as described in the preceding paragraphs, produced the following lines as prospective components of a rapid transit network for the conurbation ;

Central Area to : Northenden Altrincham Higher Blackley Bury

Branches to : East Didsbury Heald Green

These lines were then compared to establish which should receive priority in the construction of a rapid transit network for the conu rbation . The factors considered in the evaluation were :

Present and future land use Present demand and future potential Degree of improvement in quality of public transport Capital and operating cost Operational practicability

TABLE 4.9.1

LINE

Northenden

Altri ncham

Upper Blackley

Bury

East Didsbury Branch

Heald Green Branch

LAND USE DEVELOPMENTS

PRESENT

Mainly resi dential with isolated industrial areas. Restricted development nea r Ringw ay Airport. Wythenshaw e Town Centre parti ally developed.

Mixtu re of medium density res idential and industr ial. Hulme area has been largely demol ished and is currently being developed.

M ed ium density resident ial in the Collyhurst and Harpurh ey areas. Small areas of industrial development. Generally lower density residential from Barn es Green to Langley.

Mixed development along w hole corridor with varying residential density.

Residential and commerc ial area. Extensive bus net ­work radiating from East Didsbury.

Low density res identia l areas form major part of ca tch­ment area. Larger undeveloped areas are reserved for major road works or are fl ood pla ins.

FUTURE

Additional residenti al development to the east of Wythenshawe Town Centre. Shopping redevelopment probable at Withington .

The Moss Side area is to be redeveloped in th e future, no furt her major developments are known for this corridor.

Redevelopment proposed at Collyhurst, Harpurhey and new development at Dam Head Farm-all south of Vi ctoria Avenue. North· of Victoria Avenue, M iddleton town centre is being redeveloped .

Further residential development is expected in the Bury area. Residents mainly not oriented to th e Central Area of M anchester.

Residential and industrial developments planned to the east of the termin al.

Substantial town expansion expected in Wilmslow.

55

4.9.2 Present and Future Land Use The results of this appraisal are summarised in Table 4.9.1 for districts outside the Central Area . In the Central Area the recommended link would provide maximum accessibility with consequent benefits for present and future development.

TABLE 4.9.2 COMPARISON OF DEMAND FOR RAPID TRANSIT SERVICE

TO THE CENTRAL AREA

ESTIMATE OF PRESENT DEMAND

peak hour POTENTIAL FOR LINE passengers FUTURE INCREASE

Northenden 24,000 Good Altrincham 23,000 Moderate Higher Blackley 12,000 Good Bury 8,000 Little East Didsbury

Branch 3,000 Moderate Heald Green

Branch * 8,000 Moderate

*This estimate includes approximately 3,000 passengers diverted from Northenden.

4.9.3 Present Demand and Future PotC ial

This is summarised for each line in Table 4.9.2. Present demand was derived from the travel demand studies as described in Section 3 of the Report. The future potential has been assessed from a knowledge of the future develop­ment planned in each corridor.

4.9.4 Potential to Improve Existing Public Transport Service

Rapid transit, by virtue of its high performance operating characteristics, use of private right-of-way and provision of direct access to the centre of the city, would produce a significant improvement in public transport service and a reduction in travel times. To determine and accumulate the total time that would be saved by all prospective rapid transit passengers is beyond the scope of this study. However, a good measure of the improvement to be gained from each of the services considered is shown in Tabl e 4 .9.3. This compares the present journey times by car, bus or train with the journey times possible with rapid transit. Typical trips are shown from a number of major residential areas in the conurbation to the centre of the city at Market and Corporation Streets. In each case, the present

TABLE 4.9.3. COMPARISON OF JOURNEY TIMES TO ROYAL EXCHANGE, MANCHESTER BY PRESENT MODES AND BY RAPID TRANSI T

SAVINGS IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT JOURNEY

PRESENT JOURNEY TIME JOURNEY TIME TIME WITH RAPID JOURNEY BY CAR BY PUBLIC TRANSPORT WITH RAPID TRANSIT TRANSIT

between Royal Exchange and : Minutes Minutes Minutes Minutes

1. Northenden Line: Wythenshawe 30 45 29 16 Northenden 25 41 19 22 Withington 25 32 15 17

2. Altrincham Line : Altrin cham 40 40 27 13 Sale 30 34 21 13 Moss Side 15 20 11 9

3. Higher Blackley Line : Harpurhey 15 23 11 12 Middleton 25 37 23 14

4. Bury Line: Bowker Vale 20 20 15 5 Prestwich 23 18 5

5. Heald Green Branch: Gatley 35 32 21 11

TABLE 4.9.4 COST COMPARISON FOR RAPID TRANSIT SERVICE

LENGTH CAPITAL COST ANNUAL PASSENGERS COST PER SERVICE miles £ PER £1 ,000 CAPITAL PASSENGER MILE

Northenden and East Didsbury to Higher Blackley 10·9 50,000,000 1520 3·5d

Northenden to Victoria 6·2 36,000,000 1400 3 ·7d Northenden and East Didsbury to Victoria 7 ·1 37,000,000 1450 3 ·8d Northenden and Heald Gree n to Victoria 9·4 41,000,000 1400 3 ·7d Altrincham to Victoria 9·7 33,000,000 1350 3·8d Higher Blackley to University 5·3 30,000,000 1070 5d Higher Blackley to Victoria

(extension to line from Northenden and East Didsbury) 3 ·8 13,000,000 1710 2·8d

Bury to University 11 ·7 19,000,000 1200 Not available Bury to Victoria (bra nch

from Higher Blackley line) 10·2 9,000,000 1500 Not available

56

journey times are based on the fastest present means of public transport, either by train or bus. Many of the trips considered are based on a combination of public t ransport modes. The journey times shown also allow for travel to and from the station, waiting and transfer times where appropriate.

South of the Central Area, Table 4.9 .3 demonstrates the value of the Northenden line in improving public transport service to this part of the conurbation . Construction of the Northenden line would also result in service improvements fo r residents in the Altrincham and Sale corridor, by means of interchange between railway and rapid transit service in the Central Area. The converse is not true ; the Altrincham line would not benefit the Northenden corridor, since it is not served by rail except in a minor way, by the British Ra ilways Styal line.

In the North, the major benefits would be derived from construction to Higher Blackley, which route also lacks a rail line which could be used with a rapid transit link through the Central Area.

The Northenden and Higher Blackley routes have the greatest potential for future extensions on their respective sides of the Central Area . Substantial improvements in public transport can be made by future extensions of rapid transit to areas such as Wythenshawe, Ringway, Gatley, Heald Green, Middleton and Langley. The other alternatives do not offer the same opportunities for extension .

4.9.5 Capital and Operating Cost

Table 4.9.4 shows the capital and operating costs of each line, including possible branches, in relation to the traffic ca rried . For each line the following information is given :

(a) Length in miles.

(b) Capital cost of fixed facilities, including yard and workshops, and rolling stock.

(c) Passengers per £1,000 of capital invested-a measure of the number of people served each year related to the capital cost of the line.

(d) Cost per passenger mile- a measure of the annual cost, including debt charges at 6% interest and all operating expenses, related to the passenger miles generated each year. The lines would be self-supporting at fares equal to the cost per passenger mile.

The costs shown do not take into account any grant toward the capital cost nor do they include the costs of operating feeder bus and rail services.

4.9.6 Order of Priority for Construction

The results of the foregoing appraisal of the factors governing an order of priority for construction of a rapid transit network in t he conurbation are summarized below in order of priority.

(a) Northenden This line gives the highest priority rating on all factors considered; land use, demand, transport improvement and cost. The line is operationally practicable with a service connection to a yard site at Heaton Mersey.

(b) East Didsbury Branch The provision of a service connection from the

Northenden line to the yard site at Heaton Mersey makes a branch operation to East Didsbury attractive. Service to this point can be instituted for a low capital investment. A branch service introduces some difficulties from an operational point of view, and this is reflected in a slightly higher cost per passenger mile.

(c) Higher Blackley While the Higher Blackley line would be unattractive for operation as an independent unit, as an extension to the Northenden line it becomes very attractive. The Higher Blackley line serves an area of developing land use and the scope for transport improvement in the corridor is high .

(d) Heald Green Branch Extension of service from East Didsbury to Heald Green appears to be attractive because of the relatively low capital cost to institute service. From an operational point of view, extension to Heald Green would help to balance the load on the branches of the system, a desirable operating feature .

(e) Bury line The use of the Bury line is attractive from a cost point of view; however, the scope for transport improvement is relatively low considering the existence of the British Railways service which is capable of providing for the demand in the area . From an operating point of view, the distance to Bury is greater than desirable for rapid transit operation.

(f) Altrincham line This line has been given a relatively low priority because the scope for improvement in transport service is low. The British Railways service to Altrincham can provide close to rapid transit service for a relatively low capital cost. While the Moss Side area would be served by rapid transit to Altrincham, its location close to the Central Area makes the savings in t ravel time relatively small compared to present bus travel. In other factors this line ranks below the Northenden line.

4.10 THE RECOMMENDED LINES

Clearly the optimum route for a rapid transit line through the Central Area is along the corridor University Precinct­Oxford Road-St. Peter's Square-Cross Street-Corpora ­tion Street-Victoria Station. Of all possible alignments through the Central Area, this one would best serve the major existing land use developments and those anticipated in the future. In addition, this route is the best one to complement existing or improved British Ra ilways services in the conurbation . Thus the city centre would be made very accessible to the conurbation as a whole by providing the opportunity for railway passengers to transfer at Oxford Road and Victoria stations and to use the rapid transit line as a distribution system for the Centra l Area .

The overall route that would be superior in terms of present and future development, passenger potential and public transport improvements and thei r costs is the one between Northenden and Higher Blackley with a branch to East Didsbury, a total of 11 miles. At least one third of all peak trips to and from the Central Area are generated in this corridor which is served almost exclusively by bus services.

57

r

The quality of bus travel is suffering seriously from worsening traffic congestion. There are no existing railway lines which could be used to provide improved suburban rail services for a significant number of residents in this north-south corridor. Thus rapid transit is the only feasible means of improving public transport. The other areas in the conurbation would also benefit from this route by virtue of its function as a Central Area distribution system for existing or improved suburban rail services. From Northenden the route would serve Withington, University Precinct, Oxford Road Railway Station, St. Peter's Square, Victoria Station, Collyhurst, Harpurhey, and terminate at Victoria Avenue. It would be the priority for a rapid transit network for the conurbation, and is shown in Figure 4.1. The branch to East Didsbury, which has an excellent traffic potential, would also connect

to the yard at Heaton Mersey, the only site so far confirmed as being available for this pu rpose.

It is considered that rapid transit service to Altrincham and Bury is not justified for the immediate future. Existing rail services in these two corridors can be improved at much less cost to meet the forecast demand. These improvements, in combination with a Central Area rapid transit line, will substantially reduce journey time to many important Central Area points which are not within convenient walking distance of Oxford Road and Victoria stations at present.

The principal features of the recommended service are described in Section 5, the capital, operating and main ­tenance costs are given in Section 6, and revenue and other benefits are discussed in Section 7.

59

(

FEATURES OF

RECOMMENDED ·SERVICE

TORONTO

CLEVELAND

ROTTERDAM

PHILADELPHIA Delaware Ri ver Po rt Autho ri t y

BOSTON

62

(

SAN FRANCISCO Bay Area Rapid Transit

LONDON MONTREAL 'Expo'

NEW YORK

W AS HINGTON

Section five

Features of Recommended Service

5.1 INTRODUCTION

This section presents the main features of the recommended service for the Manchester rapid transit system. The features covered are : the vehicle, capacity and service, civil engineer­ing including geology and soils in the Central Area, signals and communications, power supply, stations, yards and workshops, and adm inistration.

The proposals made in this section are preliminary in nature and should be reviewed as the project proceeds in order to ta ke advantage of new technical developments and new information that may come to hand.

5.2 V EHICLE

5.2.1 General

It is proposed that the vehicle selected for operation on the Manchester Rapid Transit System be of a modern, aesthetically pleasing shape, designed to provide a com­fo rtable, fast and economic journey. Trends in modern rapid transit vehicles operating or proposed in other cities are illustrated in Figure 5.1.

The general dimensions and operating characteristics recommended for the Manchester vehicle are as follows:

Vehicle length 76' 6" approx. Vehicle width 1 O' O" Height above rail 12' O" maximum Bog ie centres 52' 6" Wheel gauge 4' St" Number of door openings per side 4 Width of door openings 4 ' 3" Seated passengers 80 Design capacity- seated and standing 200 Maximum capacity- seated and standing Maximum car weight empty Car weight- design capacity Car weight- maximum capacity Average acceleration rate at design capacity Maximum acceleration rate Average service braking rate Emergency braking rate Jerk limit Maximum speed Number of motors per car

5.2.2 Two-car Units

300 64,000 94,000

110,000

2·5 3·0 2·8 3·5 0·1 60

4

lbs. lbs. lbs.

mph . per sec. mph. per sec. mph. per sec . mph. per sec. mph. per sec . mph.

'A tra in wou ld be composed of one, two or three units, each unit be ing fo rmed of two cars semi -permanently coupled together. Both vehicles in the two -car unit would be similar,

except that one would be equipped to supply auxiliary electrical power and the other compressed air for the unit. Each car would have a cab located at one end.

Trains consisting of three-car or four-car units were con ­sidernd . However, in a small system, the larger units could impair availability of rolling stock since it would be necessary to remove the entire unit from service in the event of equipment failure on a single vehicle. As the system grows it may become economical to purchase vehicles of a non­driving motored type for insertion between cab equipped vehicles.

5.2.3 Vehicle Size

The vehicle recommended for use in Manchester would be 1 O' O" wide by 76' 6" long, which is similar to those proposed or operating in San Francisco, Tokyo, Caracas, Toronto, and other cities. British Railways have indicated that they are considering the production of suburban stock up to 80' O" in length , although only 9' 3" wid e.

The use of a large vehicle rather than smaller standard vehicles would reduce the total number of vehicles and associated equipment required, resulting in a saving in capital and operating costs. These savings should be set off against increased construction costs for a wider structure to accommodate the larger vehicle.

The nominal 10 by 75 feet vehicle would provide a spacious and comfortable interior layout making good use of the vehicle dimensions and resulting in a low car weight per passenger carried . The spaciousness of the vehicle would allow rapid loading and unloading at stations and good circljlation and distribution within the car.

Under-car equipment such as control units, batteries, compressors and other auxiliaries could be conveniently arranged under a large vehicle permitting easy access to the equipment for maintenance.

5.2.4 Vehicle Performance

The provision of a fast service would be essential if rapid transit is to compete with the private motor car. Since station spacing will be relatively close, particularly in the Central Area, high acceleration rates would be necessary to reach the desired speeds and to clear stations for following t ra ins. It is proposed that an average acceleration rate of 2·5 miles per hour per second be specif ied, with maximum acceleration restricted to 3·2 miles per hour per second. Maximum speed would be 60 miles per hour. While other systems, such as San Francisco and Washington, are proposing speeds of 70 to 75 miles per hour, the close station spacing and relatively short route in Manchester would provide little opportunity to reach these higher speeds.

63

5.2

64

ID <{ u

II \! r\.

v

'-J

(

,,0 -, ZI

~ -

.... :::

I.,__

l I I I I

_,I ~I 01

t­:::> 0

s w ..J (..)

:c w > c w en 0 Q. 0 a: Q.

Braking would be accomplished by means of rheostats connected across the motor windings, supplemented by electro -pneumatic brakes acting on the vehicle wheels. This type of braking permits the use of the energy dissipated during braking for vehicle heating and reduces wheel and brake shoe wear. The recommended braking rates would be z·B miles per hour per second for normal service stops and 3·5 miles per hour per second for emergency stops.

In order to attain this performance consistently, each axle of the vehicle would be equipped with a motor. While this would increase the number of motors and gear sets, the tractive effort and weight would be evenly distributed over all wheels thus reducing the chances of slipping and consequent 'flat' wheels. Each motor is smaller, thus reducing the loss in train performance which would result from malfunction of an individual motor.

5.2.5 Vehicle Design

The proposed body envelope would permit flexibility in the choice of seating arrangements for the Manchester vehicle. The recommended layout is shown in Figure 5.2. This layout would divide the car into sections, all with easy access from any seat to the nearest door. A spacious aisle would be provided at each door, with ample room for passenger flow in and out of the car.

A full width cab, located at one end of each vehicle, would give the operator a good view of the doors on either side of the car. Provision for emergency exit from the vehicle through the cab would be provided.

The vehicle interiors would be finished with quality wear ­resistant materials requiring a minimum of maintenance. Care would be taken in design to eliminate corners and pockets where dirt might collect. Lighting would be fluorescent providing ample illumination for reading . Large picture windows would be provided giving good visibility to the passengers. The power-operated sliding doors would have safety controls to prevent the train from starting until they were properly closed .

Experiments have been conducted in North America with the use of carpeting on the floors of rapid transit vehicles. It has been found that carpeting stands up well and requires a minimum of care. It is suggested that tests be carried out to determine the feasibility of installing carpets in the Manchester rapid transit vehicles.

5.2.6 Vehicle Capacity

The seating layout shown in Figure 5.2 provides seating for 80 passengers and a net floor area for standing passengers of approximately 385 square feet . Under a maximum loading condition of 1·75 square feet per standee, the number of standing passengers would be 220, and the maximum capacity 300 passengers, seated and standing. This capacity should be considered as an abnormal condition which would be encountered infrequently. However, the vehicle floors, brakes and springs should be designed to carry this loading without risk of damage or loss of safety.

_In order to provide for passenger comfort the service should be operated so that at least 2·5 square feet would be provided for each standing passenger. The loading would then be 234 passengers in the most heavily loaded car.

However, cars in a train do not load uniformly, and to allow for this, a factor of 0·85 should be applied to obtain the average car loading. The design capacity of each car would therefore be 200 passengers, 80 seated and 120 standing. It should be noted that the design car capacity would only be utilized in the peak hours of the day at the peak load point. During off-peak hours there would be seating for all passengers. In peak travel hours a proportion of the riders would be standees, but the maximum standing trip would not exceed 14 minutes.

5.3 CAPACITY AND SERVICE

5.3.1 Capacity The capacity of a rapid transit line is a function of the time between successive trains (headway), number of cars per train and the number of people in each car. The minimum headway possible, using modern signalling and with acceleration and braking rates at the maximum acceptable and economic level, is 90 seconds between succeeding trains, although in practice trains are rarely scheduled at this close headway and some flexibility is usually allowed for unavoidable delays. For capacity design purposes an average car loading of 200 passengers has been assumed. This takes into account the unequal loading of cars which is experienced in the peak period . The theoretical capacity of the system is shown in Table 5.3.1, related to train length and headway.

TABLE 5.3.1 THEORETICAL CAPACITY OF RAPID TRANSIT LINE

Passengers per hour in one direction

Headway

No. of Cars in Train 90 Secs 2 Mins 3 Mins 4 Mins

2 16,000 12,000 8,000 6,000

4 32,000 24,000 16,000 12,000

6 48,000 36,000 24,000 18,000

8 64,000 48,000 32,000 24,000

From a study of the travel demand estimated for the Central Area line, it is recommended that provision be made for the eventual operation of 6-car trains, which would provide ample capacity for the foreseeable future.

5.3.2 Service In establishing train service standards, train performance was based on a maximum acceleration rate of 3 mph/sec., a service braking rate of 2·8 mph/sec. and a maximum speed of 60 mph. The average station stop was taken as 20 seconds and the provision for total layover time during peak periods was 90 seconds at each terminus, 180 seconds in all. The duration of service was assumed to be 19 hours out of 24 each weekday and Saturday, and 15 hours on Sundays and holidays. On weekdays, intensive service would be required during morning and evening peak periods of 2 hours each. The services on the recommended route between Higher Blackley and Northenden and on the branch to East Didsbury have been designed as two separate services which would operate over a common section of route between Victoria and Withington. The main features of these services are shown in Table 5.3.2 .

65

TABLE 5.3.2 DETAILS OF SERVICES ON RECOMMENDED ROUTE

Route length miles Running time minutes Peak hour one-way maximum demand passengers Peak period interval between trains minutes Off-peak period interval between trains minutes Vehicles per train Peak hour service capacity at 800

passengers per train No. of trains on system No. of vehicles needed (including 10% spares)

The tentative services shown in Table 5.3.2 were designed to satisfy the demand at each of the southern ends of the line beyond the junction at Lapwing Lane, West Didsbury. It was also necessary to confirm that the service on the trunk portion of the route, that is between Withington and Victoria, would be adequate to satisfy the maximum demand at the peak load point. This demand was estimated to be 20,000 passengers in the peak hour. The combined services would provide an average interval of 2 minutes between trains over this section, and this would provide for 24,000 passengers in the peak hour.

The annual vehicle-miles and train-miles were derived from the round-trip distance, the number of trains per hour for each service, and the number of hours of peak and off­peak service respectively per day. These figures are then factored to take account of working days, Sundays and holidays and give results on an annual basis. The resulting statistics are:

Annual vehicle miles : 9,600,000

Annual train miles: 2,400,000

5.3.3 Travel Times

Rapid transit would produce greatly improved travel times compared to travel by surface routes. Running times from Market Street station to other stations on the system are given in Table 5.3.3.

TABLE 5.3.3 RUNNING TIME IN MINUTES FROM MARKET STREET TO:

Higher Blackley 10 Moston Lane 7 Queen's Park 5 Collyhurst 3 Victoria

Northenden 14 Barlow Moor Road 12 East Didsbury 13 Withington 9 Platt Lane 7 Whitworth Park 5

r University 4 Oxford Road 2 St. Peter's Square 1

Northenden and Higher Blackley

10 23

12,000

3 6 4

16,000 17 76

Service Between

5.4 CIVIL ENGINEERING

5.4.1 Introduction

East Didsbury and Victoria

5·6 15

3,000 6 6 4

8,000 6

26

The design of the supporting way will vary with attitude of the line, soil conditions, topography, type of adjacent development, and so on. Figure 5.3 illustrates the attitude along the proposed route.

A limited geological investigation was carried out in the Central Area to determine location and quality of rock. The results were used to establish the general feasibility of the route and to compare cut-and-cover and tunnel methods of construction . No special investigations were undertaken outside the Central Area, consequently, knowledge of soils and geological conditions in other areas has not developed beyond the information secured in Stage I. It should be noted that a comprehensive soils survey along the entire route would be a prerequisite for final design.

5.4.2 Geology and Soils

The route through the Central Area is some 8000 feet long, extending from the northern side of the University Precinct to Victoria Station. Eighteen borings were drilled along the route. The strata were measured and logged and a representa­tive proportion of rock and soils samples were sent for laboratory analysis and testing. A site plan, showing the location of bore holes, and a geological section are shown in Figure 5.4. Briefly, the main findings of the investigation are as follows:

The ground is made up of fill and Drift overlying 'Solid rock' . The upper regions of the Solid rocks have a zone of weathering which in the highest regions has com ­pletely reduced the rock to sand. The upper layer of material along the route is fill which overlies the Drift. The Drift is, in the main, represented by clay with local lenses of gravel and sandy clay. The fill and Drift is in the order of 25 to 35 feet thick from the Mancunian Way to the Town Hall and varies in thickness from 10 to 30 feet along the remainder of the route. The weathered zone of the Solid rocks (a red sand) varies in thickness from approximately 5 to 10 feet along most of the route, but in some places reaches depths of about 20 feet.

The Solid sedimentary rocks, of Permo-Triassic age, consist of red sandstone and marl which appear to be representative of the Bunter Sandstone. The rock is

67

5.4

68

w (.9

z <! :r: u x w

..J _J

LL

•

_J w > <! 0::: (.9

~ _J

u

•

~ u 0 0:::

0 w 0::: w :r: f­<! w ~

0 z <t {[)

{[)

z 0 f­<t u 0 _J

(.9

z 0::: 0 (IJ

_J

0 (/)

·-

0 l()

0 0

0 l()

~ Q)

c 0 -VI

<t z a: 0 Oi== f- <t u f­/ {[)

a {[)

_(j) z 0::: 0 W­f- f-w ~ Q.. <J)

I-= (./)

c:i 0::: z oo 0::: ;-0 .-lJ... ~ x (j) 0

\' · .. ~ , .: - ~ ! •

0 0

Q)

.0

-0 c 0 VI

Q)

c 0 -VI -0 c 0 VI

'­Q) -c ::I

(IJ

0 -- ----..

~--L7ntf? - ---0 --

0 l()

---

Q)

c .2 VI -0 c 0 VI

'­Q) -c ::I

(IJ

Q) c 0 -VI

-0 c 0 VI

'-Q) -c ::I

ID

-0 Q)

::I 0 ...... >.

:> 0 Q)

:r:

t-= lJ...

0 0 0 N

0 0 0

0

w _. LL 0 a: a.. _. <( CJ -~ 0 _. 0 w ~

c 2 <(

en ~ 2 a: 0 al _. 0 en

r

faulted and contains soft and weathered pockets. A

major system of faulty strata was encountered from

Mancunian Way to Oxford Road Station and there can

be no doubt that it is related to the smash zone of the

West Manchester Fault, which runs parallel to and

west of the proposed rapid transit route.

The evidence from the borings suggests that the main

body of groundwater is in the Bunter Sandstone and

the water table can be traced along the route. There

is also evidence that isolated pockets of water are

perched in the sands and gravels of the Drift.

From consideration of the ground conditions it would

appear that a near surface route of cut -and -cover

would be geologically feasible. Profiles at increasing

depths encounter rock, of which the upper parts are very

weak. The rock tends to become sounder with depth,

but this is not so in fault zones. Increase in depth also

brings the profile below the water -table. All the

evidence suggests that the strata below the main water

table will be water bearing . These strata are likely to be

heavily water bearing in faulty ground. It will be

apparent therefore that in fault zones a deep tunnel

is not likely to encounter sounder rock than a shallower

tunnel. Moreover the ground-water problems are likely

to be far greater in the deep tunnel. For these reasons,

in the vicinity of the west Manchester Fault, at Oxford

Road Station, there is considerable geological merit in

constructing the route near the surface by cut -and -cover

or at medium depth by soft ground tunnelling tech­

niques. Along the remaining part of the Central Area

route the optimum geological conditions are likely to

occur at medium depth, where soft rock with moderate

groundwater should not pose undue problems in

construction .

View of tunnel section from cut-and-cover

station

In Volume 2, Stage I, reference was made to the risk of

coal mining subsidence at the northern end of the

Central Area route. In view of the proposed closure of

Bradford Colliery it now appears that this threat has

been removed.

5.4.3 Cut-and-Cover versus Tunnel through the Central Area

The study made to compare cut -and -cover with tunnelling

methods concluded that the latter would be the preferred

technique in the Central Area . This would keep surface

disturbance during construction to a minimum, and greatly

reduce the considerable difficulties associated with diverting

major services and maintaining traffic during construction .

The proposed tunnelling scheme has a somewhat lower

capital cost than the comparable cut -and -cover scheme,

and would equal the cut-and -cover system in all significant

operational aspects.

A summary of the results of the comparison between the two

methods is given in Table 5.4.1. The Central A rea route

is shown in Figure 5.5 and a longitudinal section showing

the alternative cut -and-cover and tunnel profiles is

illustrated in Figure 5.6.

From the northern side of the University Precinct to Oxford

Road Station , the tunnel would be located in the Drift

deposits, with rail level at an average depth of 50 feet

below the surface. The West Manchester Fault lies parallel

to this section of the route and there would, therefore, be no

geological advantage in locating the tunnel deeper, as it

would then lie within the shatter zone of this fault. This·

length of the tunnel would probably be constructed by

conventional soft ground tunnelling methods using a

hooded shield and excavating with pneumatic tools.

69

WHI T WORTH

KNOIT MILL STATION ST II.EE T

UNIVERSITY

\\ STATION LOCATIONS IN CENTRAL AREA

• I

70

TABLE 5.4.1 COMPARISON BETWEEN CUT-AND-COVER AND TUNNELLING METHODS OF CONSTRUCTION

COSTS

TR AFFIC

UTILITIES

COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES

ADJACENT STRUCTURES

CONSTRUCTION PROGRESS

LABOUR MATERIALS & EQUIPMENT

SOI L CONDITIONS

ACC ESS TO WOR KING SITE

WORKMEN 'S SAFETY

ALI GNM ENT

VERTICAL TRAVEL

VENTILATION

STATION ARRANG EMENT

ARCH ITECTURAL TREATMENT

NOISE

r

VIBRATION

CUT-AND -COVER

Costs increase with depth of construction. Street decking, diverting and handling services and underpinning are costly items. Property acquisition required at stations. Estimated capital cost of construction £1 Ot m.

Pedestrian and vehicular traffic interrupted during pavement removal, decking installa ­tion and pavement restoration, along entire Central Area route. Time- consuming diversions necessary due to existing street pattern . Temporary decking restricts traffic flow and can be hazardous when wet.

Considerable interference along the entire route with the possibility of localised dis­ruptions to services causing some incon­venience to the public. Lack of knowledge of the location of old sewers in Manchester a problem. Some sewer diversions would present great difficulties, particularly if already laid to flat gradients or tunnelled into th e rock, and would be costly items.

Interference with business and social activities along the entire route. Noise, dust and mud, significant factors.

Care required to protect other structures. Underpinning required where underground structure passes beneath or close to existing buildings that are to remain. Access to, and possibly part occupation of lower floors requ ired for this purpose.

Restrictions imposed by need to maintain traffi c and handle utilities.

Standard heavy construction methods apply.

Water and soil conditions can generally be handled by conventional metho::ls. However if excavations are very deep, it may become necessary to resort to special methods to prevent water infiltration.

Restri cted by need to maintain surface traffic .

Normal heavy construction hazards.

Restricted to existing road reserves or purchased right -of-way.

Average is 30 feet from ground level to platform level.

No special problems.

Fl ex ible.

Wide choice.

Non -users unaffected. Acceptable to passengers.

Passengers unaffected. Adjacent buildings affected in some cases.

TUNNEL

Excavation and structure costly but constant with depth. Soft ground and water increase costs of excavation and structure. Escalator costs increase with depth . Street decking and utilities encountered at stations only. Easement required where line is below existing buildings. Estimated capital cost of construction £9t m.

Pedestrian and vehicular traffic interrupted at station and access shafts only.

Interference restricted to stations and access shafts only.

Interference restricted to station and access shafts only.

Minimal hazard to other structures. Under­pinning generally not required, unless tunnel very close to existing foundations. Surveys necessary during tunnelling operations to confirm that no undue settlement or vibra­tion is caused to existing buildings.

Limited to number of drives and number of men who can be employed on face and to enlarge the section at stations.

Requires specially skilled workmen and special equipment and materials.

Sensitive to water and soil conditions which may require special treatment, such as cement or chemical injection or compressed air.

Restricted to number of access shafts and headings.

Requires additional precautions for work­men.

Unrestricted.

Average is 60 feet from ground level to platform level. More esca lator maintenance.

Similar to cut-and-cover.

Slightly less flexible.

Fewer alternatives for station tunnel sections and access corridors.

Non -users unaffected. Acceptable to passengers.

Passengers unaffected. Adjacent buildings generally not affected.

CONCLUSIONS

Tunnelling offers cost saving of £1 m. compared with cut-and-cover.

Substantially more distur­bance from cut-and-cover.

Substantially more inter­ference from cut -and -cover.

Substantially more inter­ference from cut -and-cover.

Disturbance generally with cut -and-cover only. Control surveys required during tunnelling .

Slight advantage with cut­and-cover.

Tunnelling more specialised form of construction .

Tunnel likely to be affected more than cut- and-cover by soil and water conditions.

Tunnel slightly more restrictive.

Tunnel construction sl ightly more hazardous for work­men .

Tunnel more fl exible, per­mitting better station locations.

Small increase in time required to travel additional vertical distance associated with tunnel.

Both methods equally acceptable.

71

-....! N

-....! w

150 I ------

~ GROUND LEVEL

I I 110

] ....... l -1 .3 %

-----· ·~

50 440

GROUND LEVEL

llOEfflS'11ii~ I "'" p=- I -=:::::::::::::

70

z . <(

z ::>

~1>­~~

. t;; .

~i

450

i i n II

460 470 475

Ui . . BRITISH ~ ·

':JI I 3: "' §I ~ I . C~~~~~~s ~ 1

o . -" ~I

-'

!I <(

"' " "' <(

3: 3: "' z

I ===-- -Tli I t-=-= I I • I I I

'° ~----------'----------------------''----------------------'---------------------'-------..J 475 ·--48v 490 500 510 513

140,-·------:----------,----,-----;--;--~-=-----------~~---------------:~----;:i----

120 1 1· .I ' l ' 11 L PL-~ I 11 1111 -

~~~ :l j~ ~ . ~--~ I · . --- RAIL

'" " .,,~""4' l~ I·~ ::=:"'@"'- _:,,em@•d";;;"?llJI I 0

: - -••• H "~ ;n: = "'"°''" = 80 -~ .... - - ·

60~-~~~~ .... - .. -~~ ·--40 520 513 5~v 540 550

KEY

f J CUT 8 COVER CONSTUCTION

( · .... :.::·::::..:::f TUNNEL CONSTRUCTION

I\ 3 KNOWN SEWERS AFFECTED BY CONSTRUCTION - CUT-8-COVER

b ===3 KNOWN SEWERS AFFECTED BY CONSTRUCTION - TUNNEL

b d KNOWN SEWERS AFFECTED BY CONSTRUCTION - CUT-8-COVER 8 TUNNEL

lilllsllilS\11( APPROXIMATE LEVEL OF SOLID ROCK

SCA LE

100 0 iOO 200 300 400 500 HORIZONTAL

10 0 10 20 30 40 50 VERTICAL

PROFILE THROUGH CENTRAL AREA

(J'1

0)

Consolidation of the soil may be necessa ry along this

length, as may the use of compressed air if co nsiderable

water is encountered. Because Oxford Road stat ion li es

very close to the Fault it would preferably be built by the

cut-and -cover method.

From Oxfo rd Road station, for the remainder of its length ,

th e tunnel would be located in the Bunter Sandstone, which

underlies th e Drift, with rail level at an average depth of

65 feet below th e surface.

The choi ce of actual tunnelling method would be left to the

co ntractor . Th e Bunter Sandstone would appear to be

suitable for excavation by a tunnel boring machine which

may prove to be more economical th an other methods of

excavation for th e length of tunnel involved. If the drill and

blast method of excavation is employed, restrictions upon

its use may be necessa ry to comply with th e req uirements of

the local authority and property owners . It would be

necessa ry to ca rry out surveys along the route during

tunnelling operations to co nfirm that no undue settl ement or

vibration is ca used to exist ing buildings .

Th e twin 16 feet internal diameter circular cross-section was

se lected for its stru ctural suitability to ea rth tunnels, its

adaptability to various tunne lling methods (for example, the

use of rock boring machines) and economy.

A prefabricated tunnel lining would be used rath er than

one formed in place. Th e advantages in th e use of pre ­

fab ri ca ted units li e in eas ier and faster co nstructi on, less

interference with access along th e tunnel during th e placing

of th e lining and better water-proofing characteri sti cs. The

lining materi al utilised would depend upon the soil and

wa ter co nditions and the loads and pressures to be with ­

stood, and may vary to suit these co nditions along the

tunnel length.

74

5.4.4 Structural Sections

Th e suppo rting way structural sections as proposed are

described below and shown in Figures 5.7 to 5.9. The

stru ctural designs proposed are preliminary and re late

primarily to th e use of reinforced and prestressed concrete,

but this should not be construed as a final recommendation

preventing the use of other structural materials or methods

of construction which may be found to be more advan­

tageous when considered in the light of information and

conditions prevailing at the time of final design .

(a) Elevated Structure

Figure 5.7 shows typica l cross -sections for the elevated

rapid transit structure. Both systems il lustrated employ

single reinforced co ncrete co lumns and crossheads

which wou ld be spaced generally at about 60 to 100

feet centres, depending on local features and conditions.

The columns and crossheads support, in simp le spans,

precast prestressed I-bea ms with an in -situ deck slab

or, alternatively, precast prestressed trapezoida l box

beams. The beams would be positioned on bearings on

the prepared crossheads by means of a mobile crane

or a specia l launching gantry supported on th e

previously constructed adjace nt span.

Deck surfaces would be drained by channels, located

between the rails, which discharge into down pipes

in the reinforced co ncrete columns . A walkway for

maintenance wo rkers and emergen cy use would be

loca ted centrally, between th e tracks . It may be

necessary to provide noise barriers on some sections

of the elevated structure.

Figure 5.7 also shows a typical elevated station sect ion .

The superstructure of the running section wou ld be

Preparing services for cut-and-cover construction

5 .7

1 ! 1 I I

'ol I

' -Q ) J

... _ 12' - 0" PL AT_FCH-.1 I 5' -_r_ t - __14'_:_Q'' ~ c _TRACK + 5' -}'.__ ~ j 12' -o" PLATFOR M I

I

I -1-- - i ----1-1- i--i=I: - I

- --- ~-- -

~~ I

J, ~~ I J, :

l

I

I

I

"' W I

ii' I <!

>I

I

I 1

I ~

STATION SECTION ELEVATED

26 ' - 6"

14'-0" C/c TR ACK

1 -~T-1

ii >

RUNNING SECTION - I BEAM

26' - 6"

14 '-o" !;'c TRACK

TOP OF FOOTING

RUNNING SECTION

TRAPEZOIDAL BEAM

ELEVATED SECTIONS

75

5.8

RIGHT OF WAY

( ~ J ur~p .... ······· ~·····

''<"~~mTCH AS REQUIRED

76

1s· - o "

~ STRUC TURE

-0

-N I ·"'---------rr-·-··__J f TOPOf RAIL

I -r - - - -

STATION SECTION

f STRUC TURE

RUNNING SECTION

11 '-o"

RUNNING SECTION

NOTE:

CENTRE WALL OPENINGS s'- o· MIN. HEIGHT,

s'-o" LONG AT 12'-o" CENTRE TO CENTRE.

CUT-AND-COVER AND EARTHW OR

3 4' - 0" NOMINAL

RUNNING SECTION

~' 6" STATION FINISH I

-I I I

12' - O" I

STATION SECTION

5 .9

TUNNEL SECTIONS

77

78

Rock tunnelling machine

Sleeperless track­showing contact rail.

ca rri ed through th e stati on and supported on reinforced con crete portals. Pl atforms would be precast pre­stressed box beams also spanning betwee n po rtal supports.

(b) At Grade Construction

(c)

Th e term 'At Grade' refers to constru ction in shallow open cut, embankment or at gro und level. Figure 5.8 shows a typical cross-section incorpora ting th ese three attitudes.

Cut-and-Cover Construction

Fi gure 5.8 shows the reinforced concrete, double­track, box sect ion that would form the underground structure w here constructed by cut -and -cover methods. The box would be formed in situ w ithin a sing le trench excavation . Constru ction joints would be located at approximately 50 feet centres . Th e central wall would be constructed w ith openings to provide refuge bays for maintenance workers, and non ­combu stible sound insulating material would be applied to th e lower part of the w alls to redu ce the noise level from the vehi cle bog ies. An invert drain w ould discharge to sumps from which th e water would be pumped to ex isting sew ers if a gravity outfall was not possibl e.

During constru ction th e sides of th e excavation would be supported by strutted soldier pil es and timber lagging or simil ar methods. Backfill would be pla ced and compa cted over the stru ctu re after its compl etion and the ground surface conditions reinstated. Where th e ra pid transit lin e is located along ex isting roads, th e excavation would be decked over during constru ction to maintain surface traffi c, and utility services would be diverted or supported from the deck and re instated upon completion.

Figure 5.8 shows a typi ca l cut -and -cover station section .

(d) Tunnelling

Th e Line would pass throu gh the Central Area in twin 16 feet internal diameter tunnels, as shown in Figure 5.9. Th e tunnels w ould generally be spaced at approxi­mately 2 x D ce ntres, where D is th e outside diameter of ea ch bore. However, this may vary loca lly, for example, at station approaches and at th e ends of th e tunnell ed section wh ere th e tunnel transitions into th e cut -a nd- cov er box section. Th e tunn el inve rt would be built up in in -situ con crete. A drain pipe w ould be cast into th e invert and w ould di scharge to pump sumps. A typi ca l tunnell ed stati on section th at co uld be fo rmed in th e Bunter Sa ndstone is shown in Fig ure 5.9. This section would be co nstru cted by d ri v ing and supporting, or lining, th e running tunn els through th e stations and subseq uent ly opening up around t he running tunnel by hand to fo rm th e enlarged stat ion sections.

5.4. 5 Trackwork

Rails w ould be 11 3 lb ./ ya rd sec ti ons we lded into co ntinuous lengths. On elevated and be low-ground structures th e rails

Access shaft- tunnelling operation

would be attached directly to th e concrete roadbed, bu t w ould be iso lated th erefrom by rubber pads thus reducing the effect of vibration upon th e stru ctu res and surrou ndings. In th e 'At Grade' attitud e, th e rails w ould be ca rri ed on tim ber or co ncrete sleepers laid on ball ast under lain by a granular sub -base.

Th e use of th e sleeperl ess t racks on elevated st ructures eliminates th e need to ca rry the dead load of ba ll ast and sleepers, and in th e underg round stru ctures red uces the verti ca l depth req uired to accomm odate ba ll ast.

Futu re development of con tinu ously supported ra il s may have favo urab le effects upon the leve ! of no ise and v ibration produ ced by a mov ing tra in . Further co nsiderati on shou ld be g iven to the method of ra il support at a late r stag e of design w hen more operat ing experience has been ga ined w ith new fo rms of trackwo rk.

5.4.6 Li mitation s of Flat Junct ions

Th e recommended ro ute would have a junction at Lapwing Lane, w here the branch line to East Didsbury and th e storage yard leaves the ma in line from Hig her Blackl ey to

79

80

Rapid Transit yard and workshops

Control Centre­British Railways

Northenden. Both lines would be double track, so that two sets of junction switches would be necessary, a 'facing' connection dealing with the diverging movements of south ­bound trains and a 'trailing' connection handling the converging movements of northbound trains.

Any junction layout involves possible conflict between main line and branch line movements. If the junction is a flat one-that is, all connections are at the same level- then there are two places where conflicts can arise. One of these can be eliminated by taking one branch connection under or over the two main lines and thus separating them physically. Studies were undertaken, with a view to determining the conditions under which the expense of physical separation would be justified. The following conclusions were drawn :

(a) Any junction handling services with headways closer than 2t minutes should be grade-separated . While closer-headway services are being worked over flat junctions, these operations are not satisfactory since delays are frequently experienced.

(b) While grade-separated junctions are more costly to construct, they do avoid the heavy maintenance costs of the diamond rail crossings which are otherwise necessary. Such crossings also add to the noise level of the system.

(c) Because of the importance of the junction at Lapwing Lane to the operation of the system as a whole, and since service intervals of 90 seconds will occur frequently, it is recommended that this junction should be grade-separated.

5.4.7 Yards and Workshops

The storage, cleaning and maintenance of vehicles would be carried out at the yards and workshops of the system. The workshops would also serve as a base for maintenance of track, signals and mechanical and electrical equipment.

The main requisites of a yard site are:

1. Access to the rapid transit line;

2. Sufficient area to carry on the required operations;

3. Space for expansion;

4. A British Railways connection to facilitate delivery of rolling stock, rail and heavy supplies ;

5. Ground contours permitting preparation of level storage areas with a minimum of earthwork;

6. Adequate road access.

Some of the heavier and more specialised repair work, e.g. major repairs to traction motors and car re -building, could be performed by specialist companies outside the rapid transit system. All routine repairs, inspections and cleaning of the rolling stock would be carried out within the workshops.

The layout and design of the facilities will , of course, depend . on the site, but an approximate estimate of the area required .would be 20 to 30 acres, of wh ich the workshop buildings Would occupy some three acres.

5.5 SIGNALS AND COMMUNICATIONS

5.5.1 Introduction

The term 'signals and communications' embraces the means of controlling train movements and disseminating information throughout the rapid transit system.

This role is particularly important in a high-capacity, high ­density rail service where the maximum degree of safety must be combined with the most efficient utilisation of the track, and instant communication is vital to efficient operation . The systems proposed represent the application of the latest advances in these fields to the Manchester system.

5.5.2 Signal System Functions

The functions of a signal system in a rail rapid transit system can be defined as follows :

(a) To preserve a minimum safe distance at all times between trains on the same t rack ;

(b) To ensure smooth operation of the train service in accordance with the timetable ;

(c) To route trains into the correct tracks at junctions, terminals, etc., while safeguarding conflicting move­ments.

The system must be designed to function in a fail-safe manner. This means that any failure of a vital component or circuit will produce the most restrictive conditions- for example, the failure of a track circuit to function will ensure that train movements over the portion of line affected can only take place at low speed.

5.5.3 Signal System Characteristics

Signal systems satisfying the requirements given above can vary in cost and complexity from the simplest wayside signal installation controlled from a local signal box to a complex computer -controlled and remotely -supervised system featuring automatic control of all possible functions, including the trains themselves. Because of the nature of the service and the high cost of right -of -way and rolling stock, a rapid transit system such as that proposed for Manchester would justify a high degree of automation . This would ensure maximum utilisation of the high -cost items, and minimum labour and maintenance costs.

A signal system comprises three main parts :

(a) A means of supervising train movements (a signal box or control room) ; ·

(b) An interlocking system to detect the position of t rains and ensure that unsafe conditions cannot arise ;

(c) A means of indicating to the train operator or to equip ­ment on the train the maximum safe speed at which the train can be operated .

Supervision is usually exercised by means of a control panel

81

5 .10

AUTOMATIC SCHEDULING

DEVICE

TRACK

BRAKING MARK

CAB SIGNAL

CONTROL

CENTRE CONSOLE

CONTROLS J INDICATIONS

LOCAL

INTERLOCK ING

j

SIGNALS

8 POINTS

' j

TRAIN

DETECTION

FROM RAILS

CONTROLS VIA

RAILS 8 TRAIN -r--.----1

OPERATING

RECORDS

TRAIN

IDENTITY MARK

CARRIED COILS ------'""'

VIA VIA

TRAIN- TRAIN-

CARRIED CARRIED COIL COIL

I TRAIN

COMMAND 8c MARK - SPEED CHECK -RECEPTION 8c DECODING

TRAIN LOGIC 8c CONTROLS

BRAKES MOTOR

T TRAIN

SUPERVI S 10 N

SUB-SYSTEM

TRAIN

PROTECTION

SUB - SYSTEM

TRAIN

OPERATION

SUB -SYSTEM

BLOCK SCHEMATIC OF AUTOMATIC TRAIN OPERATION 82

which can be located at any part of the system, although for administrative convenience it is preferable to locate it in the headquarters offices of the operating authority. A relay room is associated with the control panel and located as close to it as practicable. Here pre-wired groups of relay sets provide the interlocking to ensure against unsafe cond itions arising on the line, and act as the link between the trackside equipment and the control panel.

The function of indicating to the train operator the maximum speed at which he may safely travel is performed in con ­ventional modern signal systems by a colour-light signal mounted alongside the track. This conveys one of three or four messages to the train operator, depending on the aspect exhibited as he approaches it. On British Railways the tra in brakes are applied automatically if the driver fails to acknowledge an audible warning given on passing a signa l whose aspect requires him to brake.

While this British Railways system affords a satisfactory standard of safety under their conditions of mixed passenger and freight traffic and relatively long headways, it is not suitable for high-speed, close-headway rapid transit services composed entirely of trains of identical stock equipped with fast-act ing braking systems. For services of this kind it is desirable to use a system affording as high a degree of safety and control over train operations as possible. The main features of such a system, known as Automatic Tra in Operation {A.T.O.) , are illustrated in Figure 5.10.

The automation provided by A.T.O. allows trains to run completely unmanned. For safety and security reasons, however, it is desirable for an operator to be on the train at

r

Cab of Victoria Line train-London

all times, and this employee would also control the opening and closing of the doors. A.T.O. thus permits a reduction in staff costs by enabling one man on each train to carry out the duties performed on non-automatic trains by driver and guard. It offers consistent operation and optimum power economy beyond the capabilities of a human operator, and this results in lower power consumption and less wear and tear on vehicle, track and structure. Because the response time of the automatic equipment is short, closer headways can be tolerated and more trains run.

It is anticipated that developments in A.T.O. over the next few years will not only result in improved equipment and techniques, but may also result in some cost reduction due to more widespread use of standardised solid state com­ponents, continual decrease in physical space requirements for equipment housing and writing-off of development costs.

5.5.4 Recommendations

It is recommended that a signal system of the type shown in Figure 5.10, including Automatic Train Operation, be considered for Manchester. The technology for such a system exists today, and automatic trains have been running in public service in London, Montreal (Expo Express) , New York and Hamburg.

To provide the communications network necessary to promote efficient operation and to enable passengers and staff at all levels to be instantly informed of situations affecting the running of the line, the provision of communica ­tion facilities such as those shown in Figure 5.11 is recommended .

83

5 .11

84

TRAINS

/ PASSENGERS

SERVICE VEHICLES

RIGHT OF

WAY

KEY

- 1--1-t-

MASTER CLOCK

Q CONTROL

a ADMINISTRATIVE

CENTRE

PHYSICAL TELEPHONE LINK

CARRIER TELEPHONE LINK

PUBLIC ADDRESS SYSTEM

RADIO TELEPHONE LINK

ALARM DATA LINK

STANDARD TIME

CLOSED CIRCUIT TELEVISION

G) SLAVE CLOCK

G) STATIONS

---~--""

' PASSENGERS

YARD e

SHOPS

\ YARD TRAIN OPERATORS

OFFICES

SCHEMATIC OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM

5.6 POWER SUPPLY

5.6.1 Traction Power System Selection

There are two methods of feeding power to electric railway trains : overhead conductor and contact rail. There are also two kinds of energy that can be fed to the trains: alternating current and direct current, usually designated a.c. and d.c. It is possible to have either kind of energy fed by either method.

In t he course of the study, all contemporary systems of tract ion power supply for multiple-unit electric trains were considered and evaluated. Those systems which for various reasons were not suitable for application to a high -density rap id transit system in Manchester were eliminated, and the th ree systems which remained were analysed in more deta il before one was final ly selected. These three systems are:

(a) The 25 kv a.c. Overhead System

r

This is the standard system for British Railways main line electrification, and is used on parts of their suburban network in the Manchester area. Its principal advantage lies in its ability to take power directly from the national grid and transm it it economically over long distances. This advantage, however, has no great relevance to a rapid transit system covering a small area .

The disadvantages of the 25 kv a.c. overhead system, on the other hand, are considerable in a rapid transit system. The necessity of provid ing clearance for the vehicle current collector, the overhead wi re and its supporting structures increases construction costs materially for a line with considerable sections of underground construction . In ground-level or elevated

25 k.v. a.c. catenary­British Railways

sections, the contact wire support structures would detract from the appearance of the line.

It is necessary to immunise signals and communications plant and personnel from the effects of induced voltage from the traction system. The necessity of carrying train -borne transformer and rectifier equipment to convert the a.c. line voltage to lower voltage d.c. suitable for the traction motors is a serious disadvantage. If at some future date it became expedient for rapid transit trains to travel over Brit ish Railways tracks electrified at 25 kv on the overhead system, the fact that the two electrification systems were different would not prevent their sharing the same tracks.

It is concluded that the economic and technical disadvantages of the 25 kv a.c. overhead system preclude its employment for rapid transit services in Manchester.

(b) The 1500 volts d.c. Contact Rail System This system is theoretically attractive because the high voltage could mean fewer sub-stations or smaller conductor rail. From a practical point of view, however, these advantages are offset by the probability that the third rail would have to be displaced from the position conventional on 750 volts d.c. third rail systems. This could lead to difficulties in accommodating the third rail in the structure and the collector-shoe on the vehicle. There are also difficulties associated with the higher leakage currents. It should be noted that no modern rapid transit system operates at 1500 volts d.c. from a contact rail.

It is concluded that the practical disadvantages of the 1500 volts d.c. contact rail system outweigh its advantages for application in Manchester.

85

5.12

C.E.G.8. llkv.

0---=--WHITEGATE

PARK

VICTORIA

PARK

C.E.G.8.

D= --SHARSTON

KEY

RAPID TRANSIT LINE WITH STATIONS

GRID SUPPLY POINT

TRACTION POWER sue- STATION

YARD a SHOPS

llkv C.E.G.B. FEEDER CABLE

llkv RAPID TRANSIT DISTRIBUTION

CABLE .

750v de CONTACT RAIL FEEDER .

m;fml D

• C>

PROPOSED PRIMARY POW ER SUPPLY DISTRIBUTION SCHEM E 86

(c) The 750 volts d.c. Contact Rail System

r

This is by far the most commonly used traction power system in rapid transit rail networks throughout the world, and it is currently being installed in a number of cities where new rapid transit lines are being con­structed.

There are a number of sound reasons for its popularity, the principal being the fact that all the equipment associated with it has been developed and tested over a considerable number of years, and has reached a high standard of reliability. Traction current may be collected on each vehicle of a train so that all axles can be motored without the need for electrical connections carrying heavy currents between vehicles. Transformer and rectifier equipment would be housed in wayside sub-stations without being subjected to the wear and tear associated with equipment carried on the trains. This would reduce maintenance costs, while the associated reduction in vehicle weight would result in lower power costs. The large stationary units operating in sub-stations under good conditions would be of higher efficiency than train-borne units, while the high frequency of trains on a rapid transit system would ensure that the sub -station equipment was used to best advantage.

In the United Kingdom, current collection has normally been from the top of a single conductor rail mounted outside the running rails . The use of a vertical shoe on the vehicle makes it difficult to protect the rail from the weather and from accidental contact. Systems using side and bottom current collection from the third rail are in use, but the advantages these systems offer in enabling the conductor rail to be protected from the weather are more than offset by the complexity of the support and insulation methods which must be adopted for them .

Traction power sub -station

There are advantages in protecting a top -contact third rail , and this can be achieved by fitting the vehicle with a horizontally-projecting collector shoe as used in North America rather than the vertical shoe used in the United Kingdom. The former arrangement allows a board to be mounted above the rail , providing a con ­siderable degree of protection against the effects of severe weather or accidental contact.

5.6 .2 Recommendation It is recommended that the 750 volts d.c., top-contact, protected third rail system with running rail return be adopted for rapid transit in Manchester, on the grounds that it would be technically and economically superior to all other possible systems.

5.6.3 Primary Power Distribution The diagram in Figure 5.12 illustrates a tentative primary power supply distribution network for the recommended rapid transit route. Supplies would be obtained from the Central Electricity Generating Board from two geographically separate points on their network, fed in duplicate 11 kv cables to the railway, and distributed along the line to sub­stations, stations and yards by means of private cables. Sub -stations located at roughly 7,000 feet intervals along the line would house transformers, rectifiers, switchgear and auxiliary equipment providing 750 volts d.c. supplies for traction power.

Duplication of key items of equipment and the ability to feed the whole network from either or both supply points would provide an electrical system with a high degree of reliability. In addition, emergency lighting and vital services would be supplied from a battery or standby generator in the unlikely event of a complete loss of mains supply. Sub­stations and electrical distribution points would be un­attended and a remote supervisory system would enable all

87

88

•

Rapid Transit control centre

Traction power sub-station

power supply switching operations and load monitoring to be performed from a control and indication panel at the Control Centre. Electrical requirements for mechanical equipment and lighting at stations would be supplied by transformers fed from the 11 kv distribution cables.

5.7 STATIONS

5.7.1 Design of Stations

The main elements of station design-escalators, stairways, corridors, platforms and fare collection facilities-must combine to provide users with an unimpeded path through the station . The modal split of arriving passengers would be a major factor in design and would vary greatly from terminal stations to those in the central area . The archi ­tectural treatment of the stations would vary from the simplest form of brick or concrete building to elaborate spacious stations. In all cases, one of the most important considerations would be a pleasing appearance for both the passenger and the adjacent community. Schematic drawings of a cut-and-cover station and of an elevated station are shown in Figures 5.13 and 5.14.

5.7.2 Access and Circula,tion

Access and circulation would be of vital importance in all stations. Difficult and confusing access from street level to platform would discourage patrons from using the facility. Surface entrances at street level should be located to intercept the main flows of pedestrians destined for the station. They should be adequate in number and wide enough to obviate the necessity of queuing at the entrances and exits. At locations adjacent to large office buildings or department stores, direct access could be arranged from the buildings to the station .

Space would be required at all stations for cleaners' storage, electrical facilities and staff washrooms. It would also be

r

Rapid Transit station with bus loop

necessary to provide facilities for train crews and a des­patcher at terminal stations.

The use of pedestrian overbridges for interchange from platform to platform combined with a control area suspended between the roof of the structure and the platform would be an economical use of space in a cut-and -cover station . This form could also be used to advantage in tunnel con ­struction to reduce escalator costs; alternatively, a mezzanine could be introduced between platform and street but a complete study of each station should be made to determine the most practical and economical approach.

5.7.3 Feeder Bus and Parking

Access and site circulation would be important at all stations and vital in suburban areas.

In most cases buses would be entering and leaving from major roadways. If the volume of bus traffic were to be heavy it would be necessary to provide road widenings and turning lanes for the buses to remove them from the main stream of traffic . At terminal points where there may be several platforms provided for buses, access from the platforms to a passageway connected directly to the main terminal control area should be provided.

Parking facilities should be provided at all stations except those in the central area. The actual number of spaces required would be determined from the latest traffic figures available at the time of design.

Long term parking areas should accommodate both auto­mobile circulation and pedestrian circulation and should be designed in such a way as to minimise conflict, reduce delays and provide adequate safety for cars and pedestrians. This would best be accomplished by the use of as many entrances as feasible leading directly to the circulation roadways within the parking area. Where a great demand for parking is anticipated in areas of high land value,

89

(0 0

(0

' ' - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - ---- ___ L.._-.=-_----------------=-=r __ - - -~-

PUBLIC STREET ~ ~~ PUBLIC STREET ENTRANCE ~ - --- --- ----- - ------ - ------- -- --- ----- ---- ----- --- -- ---.; -- --- -, '. ( -------5-- ~--- - ----- ---r"'A __ __ _ --- -- --- - -- --- --

---,-' -,-I I I I I - ..,--'

ri-------------------- ~- ---t----nJ ----~-~==±=====-~-~== ~-~-= ---=: ---.t---- - --- ----i-t ____ _ : !~··iJ.r11- 'jj', ;1

1 ' :!l_]~'.!jli/!;, !!J!fl:" .. ] O l~I' W I

I :·:111·11 luL,: ' [.lll.'.'.!11.f/.,J .. I ,.1i1rn.1111i - ~ CONTROL L .. : · MEzz ilN1NE • :c'~Il!IJ/lln 11u11ip_ _: rt : : "- AREA r :

~~_::~_:-~T~ ~:-::-::-~~:-::--:-_----~-_-=_-=_-=_-=_-_-_-_-r-=_~ ~~=tL

1(r

PLATFORM - - - - -------t:=---==---= = =

I I I I "'- I A I I I I I I I I

I -0 I

II I c I

I aJ

' n I

CJ)

~ ::0 fTJ fTJ ~ ,

' I I I

' I , I I I

i

r I

PL ATFORM

LONGITUDINAL SECTION

SECTION A- A

SCHEMATIC LAYOUT OF A CUT-AND-COVER STATION

(J'I ~

w

r- -I

I I

' I I

I I

I I

I I

I

.L._._ ....

CD N

(!) VJ

I

-· ~~r--. -- ~~~. I~-

(11

..... ~

~ ~BLfc S/RE:E:r

I

I I I I I I I

0 I z I ni I

~ I I I I -< I I

l I

I I I I

I I I I

BUS ROADWAY A l PUBLIC STREET

" Uiiriimm~ fiTijjfrfuirm :~ - D

' ~--------------- CONTRO L AREA

CAR PARK

ONE WAY PUBLIC STREET

BUS ROADWAY

LONGITUDINAL SECTION

SECTION A - A

SCHEMATIC LAYOUT OF AN ELEVATED STATION

94

Automatic turnstiles London

Montreal Metro­platform and train

Architecturally treated ventilation shaft

consideration should be given to the construction of parking garages.

At many of the stations, consideration should be given to providing an area very close to the station entrance for short term waiting completely separate from the parking area and supplied with a separate entrance and exit. The number of spaces allowed would depend on the volume of passengers using each individual station .

Space for taxis should be provided at all stations. At locations such as Oxford Road station and Victoria station where there is an interchange between the rapid transit and British Railways, provision should be made for a larger number of taxis as well as short term parking.

5.7.4 Architectural

The station should be as large as is economically practical to give a feeling of spaciousness. This may be accentuated by variations in the height and width of stations, an adequate level of ' illumination, and the use of skylights and glazed areas. These would assist the passengers in the recognition of the internal organization of the facility and in surface and elevated stations would allow a view and awareness of the stati on as part of the community and landscape. The selection of materials to provide safety, durability, ease of maintenance and aesthetic qualities should be consistent throughout the system and provide a desirable continuity.

To maintain high illumination levels, colours of a light tone shou ld be used. All materials should be hard, dense, non ­porous, and acid and alkali resistant. Sound-absorbing materials should be used wherever practical. Textured materials, if they are consistent with durability and main ­tenance, could be used to enhance appearance and reduce noise levels in passages and control areas. Many materials are subject to damage due to vandalism and therefore should

be either avoided altogether or used in areas out of reach of the public .

5.7.5 Fare Collection

The method of fare collection would depend to a great extent upon the fare structure established for the system. The fare structures in use on rapid transit systems are as follows:

(a) Single fare -same charge irrespective of distance

(b) Zone fare

travelled.

-system divided into zones from a central point and fare based on the number of zones travelled. An additional fare is charged each time a new zone is entered.

(c) Mileage fare -the charge is based on the actual distance travelled.

While the single fare is the simplest and least costly fare to collect, the riders travelling short distances are penalized in comparison with those travelling greater distances; the zone fare penalizes those making short journeys which cross a zone line.

The mileage fare offers charges that are consistent with the transport provided. It requires that tickets be issued at the point of entry and collected at the point of exit, so that the charges should recover the costs of collecting the fares as well as providing transport.

Equipment for the automatic sale and collection of fares is being intensively developed for use in many existing and proposed rapid transit systems. These davelopments should be examined, at a point in time closer to operation of rapid transit in Manchester, to determine if they can be used to advantage.

95

5 .15

96

>­f-a:: 0 I f­:)

<!

f­a:: 0 a.. (/) z <! a:: f-

a:: w l9 <! z <! ~

_J

<! a:: w z w l9

Cf)

z 0 ...... u z ::> LL

LL LL <{ ...... Cf)

-

...___

-

_J w a::(/) zwZ zIO 0 f- i= (/) 0 u 0:,..., z w l.U ::) Cl. LL

w l9 z 0 i= z

<!<tiz z ::) -LL

0 0 u <!

z 0

>- i= a:: <! ~ a:: w <ti f-a:: (/) u z w -(/) ~

l9 z

l9

0 <!

z (/) -w a:: 0 W­W> z a:: <:!> w z (/) w

-

Cf)

z 0 t­u z ::> LL

w z _J

(/) w 0

> a:: w (/)

(/) ::)

m (/)

a:: w l9 <! z <! ~

<! w a:: <!

(/) w u > a:: w (/)

f-(/)

z <! a:: f-

0

a.. <! a:: a:: w l9 <! z <! ~

z 0 f-<! a:: f-(/)

z ~ 0 <!

0 LL LL <! 0: f-

l9 z a:: w w z l9 z w

z 0 f-<! a:: f-(/) -z ~ 0 <!

(/)

z 0 f-<! a:: w a.. 0

(.!)

z a:: w w z l9 z w

2 0 -~ en -2 ~ (.!J a: 0 w > -~ a: .... en -2 -:E c ~ c w en 0 c.. 0 a: c..

5.8 ADMINISTRATION

5.8.1 Introduction

In determining how the rapid transit service can best be organized and administered, it is desirable first to examine the main objectives in providing rapid transit service. These are :

(a) To provide improved public transport service in the community within the context of an overall land use and transportation plan and policy ;

(b) To plan and operate the service in the most effective and efficient manner to meet the requirements of the public and of the transportation policy.

To meet the first objective, the rapid transit service would best be organized and administered within the framework of the existing Manchester City Transport or the proposed Passenger Transport Authority, and not as a separate entity. These agencies would be responsible to the local community for implementing the transportation policies in terms of the requirements for public transport. They are referred to below as the 'Authority' .

The second objective is related to the efficient operation of the rapid t ransit service itself and its co-ordination with the other forms of publ ic transport in the community. This objective could be achieved by clearly specifying the part to be undertaken bv, rapid transit services in meeting the overall requirements for public transport and by setting up an administrative organization which can be held fully responsible and accou r,i table to the Authority in meeting these objectives. The rapid transit organization, however, must have the necessary authority and degree of autonomy vested in it for the day-to -day running of the service, if it is to function as a viable unit which can be held fully responsible for the effective operation of rapid transit service.

5.8.2 Administrative Organization for the Rapid Transit Service

By way of illustration Figure 5.15 is a simplified organization chart showing how the administrative organization of the rapid transit service could fit into the overall organization of a Passenger Transport Authority . This would ensure that the planning and operation of rapid transit would be carried out in accordance with the transportation policy established fo r the area . Alternatively, the rapid transit service could be integ rated with the administration of the City Transport in a similar way.

The rapid transit service would be managed by an organiza ­tion responsible to the Authority for the day-to -day operation of the rapid transit system.

This type of organization has been extremely successful elsewhere in developing efficient operational units. The responsibility for the performance of each unit and the necessary authority to make this possible is vested in one official who can then be held fully accountable fo r the

success of his particular unit, in terms of meeting both service standards and operating efficiency. Each operational unit must, of course, operate in accordance with the overall policy and directives of the Authority and its Executives. It is particularly Important that the services operated by individual units be fully co -ordinated with each other.

5.8.3 Factors Influencing Choice of Operating Agency

The rapid transit system could be operated by employees of the Authority, or it could be operated, either in whole or part, by British Railways or an independent contractor . For the purpose of this study, a firm decision on who will run the rapid transit service is not essential. However, the organization operating the system will have some bearing on location or design standards if any option remains after satisfying the over-riding considerations of demand and operational practicability. In view of this possibility, the relative advantages and disadvantages of operation by the Authority, British Railways, or a contractor have been examined in general terms to determine if one shows any marked advantage over the others.

As a result of this examination it has been concluded that operation of the system by an independent contractor is hardly feasible. There are no such contractors operating in this country, so that the principal advantages of such an arrangement, a basis of previous experience and a pool of trained staff, would not be available.

The only factors which could strongly favour the service being operated by British Railways on behalf of the Authority are cost or operational practicability should extensive joint use of tracks prove desirable. Cost cannot be evaluated at present and the joint use of tracks appears to be unlikely . In the case of the other factors considered, the advantages in favour of British Railways running the service are not considered to be sufficiently important to offset the main advantage of having the service run directly by the Authority - namely direct control over how the service is administered, manned and run to meet local requirements. In several areas where there could be an advantage in using British Railways facilities or personnel it might be possible to contract with the railway fo r these services without losing direct control over operation of the service.

Perhaps the strongest argument in favour of the operation of the rapid transit system by the Authority would be in the ability to transfer the operating staff to rail services, thus alleviating the redundancy which might result from the replacement of bus services by rapid transit.

5.8.4 Conclusions

It is recommended that the Authority operate the rapid transit service with its own employees as far as possible. Some specialized services, particularly those associated with maintenance, might be better carried out under contract but each case should be separately investigated and the contract cost compared with the cost of carrying out the work with Authori ty staff .

97

•

Ii

·1

.I

.:

::

r

,~ CAPITAL AND OPERATING COSTS Pl'

-

, '

'

;

I

I

I

6.1 CAPITAL COST

Capital costs have been estimated for the recommended route from Northenden to Higher Blackley, including the branch to East Didsbury and the service connection to the yards and workshops proposed at Heaton Mersey. The cost of rolling stock has been included.

The costs were generally based on unit costs prepared in 1967 for the Study of Rapid Transit Systems and Concepts forming Stage I of the Manchester Rapid Transit Study. These were up-dated to allow for the increases in costs that have taken place since then . Adjustments have also been made to all items, where considered necessary, to reflect the more detailed information available in this Stage of the study, particularly with regard to tunnelling conditions in the Central Area.

The total estimated capital cost for the recommended route has been summarised in Table 6.1.

TABLE 6.1 SUMMARY OF CAPITAL COSTS

ITEM

Track and Structure

Services

Stations

Power Supply

Signals

Communications

Yards and Workshops

ESTIMATED TOTAL PROJECT COSTS

BY ITEMS

£16,000,000

800,000

7,600,000

900,000

1,600,000

800,000

3,000,000 £30,700,000

Eng ineering (12%) 3,700,000

Rolling Stock 4,400,000

Property 4,800,000 9,200,000

Contingencies (15%) 6,500,000

£50, 1 00,000

6.2 STAGED CONSTRUCTION

If necessary the work could be staged in two sections, namely a minimum first section from Northenden to Victoria Station, including the East Didsbury Branch and the yard site at Heaton Mersey, and a section from Victoria

Section six

Capital and Operating Costs

Station to Higher Blackley. The total capital cost would be divided between the sections as shown in Table 6.2. A programme of annual capital expenditure can be found in Section 8 of this Report.

TABLE 6.2 CAPITAL COST OF STAGED CONSTRUCTION

SECTION 1 (Northenden and SECTION 2

East Didsbury (Victoria to ITEM to Victoria) Higher Blackley)

Fixed facilities and property £32,900,000 £12,200,000

Rolling Stock 3,900,000 1,100,000

Total Capital Cost £36,800,000 £13,300,000

6.3 ANNUAL DEBT CHARGES

The annual debt charges based on the total estimated capital costs have been calculated on an annuity basis at six per cent and eight per cent interest rates. Life expectancy for the items being considered is given in Table 6.3 together with the appropriate annual factors.

TABLE 6.3 ANNUITY FACTORS

Annual Annual Factor at Factor at

ITEM YEARS 6% 8%

Buildings, structures and permanent way 60 0·062 0·081

Signals and power supply equipment 30 0·072 0·089

Rolling stock 25 0·078 0·093 Property 0·060 0·080

These factors, applied to the estimated capital costs, give:

Annual debt charges at 6 per cent : £3,220,000

Annual debt charges at 8 per cent: £4, 150,000

While present interest rates are close to eight per cent this is believed to be an unusual situation. For this reason, the debt charges based on a six per cent rate have been used for estimating total annual costs.

101

)

6.4 ANNUAL OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE COSTS

Annual operating and maintenance costs have been esti ­mated under five main divisions and are shown in Table 6.4.

TABLE 6.4 ANNUAL OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE COSTS

Northenden and East Didsbury to Higher Blackley

Maintenance of Way and Structures Maintenance of Equipment Power Conducting Transportation Other Operating Expenses

102

£260,000 280,000 360,000 350,000 190,000

£1,440,000

6.5 COMBINED ANNUAL AND CAPITAL COSTS

Total annual costs including th e annual maintenance and

operating expenses plus annual debt charges are:

Annual debt charges at 6%

Annual maintenance and operating expenses

Total Annual Cost

£3,220,000

1,440,000

£4,660,000

It should be noted that liability for local rates has not been

included in the total annual cost. The rateable value of the

system is indeterminate as yet.

REVENUE AND OTHER BENEFITS

7.1 REVENUE

The capital and operating costs of the rapid transit service would be offset by fares and other benefits to the community. Estimates of revenue are, of course, dependent on two factors, the number of passengers handled and the fare charged for the service provided . In developing revenue estimates for the recommended first part of the conurbation rapid transit network, the demand estimates were used to produce a fo recast of the annual passenger miles for the service. As noted in Section 3, the demand estimates could possibly vary by up to 20 per cent of the number forecast. It was assumed that fares would be based on the distance travelled (the usual practice in the United Kingdom) and in calculating the estimated revenue for the system an average fare of 3d. per mile was used. This compares with the present Manchester City Transport fares which range from 1 ·8d to 6d per mile depending upon distance travelled, the average being approximately 3d per mile. The average fare on London Transport Underground services is 3·1 d per mile. Annual costs and revenues were compared to show financial results for the following possible conditions:

(a) Annual maintenance and operating expenses plus debt charges on full capital cost, traffic figures as forecast;

(b) Similar to (a) but assuming a 20% reduction in forecast traffic figures;

(c) Annual maintenance and operating expenses plus debt charges assuming a 75% capital grant, traffic figures as forecast;

(d) Similar to (c) but assuming a 20% reduction in forecast traffic figures.

Section seven

Revenue and other Benefits

Costs per passenger mile and thus fares required to produce a 'break even' situation were also developed for each of the four conditions.

The results of the comparisons are shown in Table 7.1 . The figures shown are for rapid transit service only and make no provision for the costs and revenues of associated feeder bus and connecting rail services.

It is evident that, within the context of public transport operations, the project would be financially viable if a 75 per cent grant could be applied to capital costs to reduce annual debt charges, even if the traffic forecast were reduced by 20 per cent.

7.2 BENEFITS

The benefits which the community would derive from the construction of a rapid transit line extend far beyond the considerable savings in time which would accrue to passengers using the line. Other benefits would include:

(a) Reduction in road traffic by the removal of public transport vehicles from the roads parallel to the rapid transit line ;

(b) Reduction in road traffic by the attraction of car drivers to public transport ;

(c) Increase in property values due to improved accessibility of the Central Area and the regions served by rapid transit ;

(d) Increase in economic activity and productivity resulting from the improved mobility of the population.

These benefits are difficult to assess in relation to the costs of the project but would be of definite social and economic value to the community.

TABLE 7.1 COMPARISON OF FINANCIAL RESULTS

Forecast Annual Passenger miles 323,000,000 Capital Cost £50,100,000

CONDITION

ITEM

Ann ua l debt charges

Annual maintenance and operating expense

Total annual cost

Annual revenue at 3d per passenger mile

Annual surplus ( + ) or deficit ( - ) at 3d per passenger mile

Fare per mile to produce 'break even' operation

No Capital Grant with

Forecast Traffi c at

100% 80%

£3.220.000 £3,220,000

1.440,000 1.440,000

4,660,000 4,660,000

4,030,000 3,220,000

- 630,000 - 1.440,000

3·5d. 4 ·3d .

75% Capital Grant with

Forecast Traffic at

100% 80%

[ 810,000 [ 810,000

1.440,000 1.440,000

2,250,000 2,250,000

4,030,000 3.220,000

+ 1.780,000 + 970,000

1 ·7d. 2 ·1d.

105

PROGRAMME FOR FUTURE ACTION

8.1

"£L61 'Jaqwaoaa · 1s1

NOl1.V~3d0 N1838

I'-....J O'> <l'. >

~ 0

....J 0:: a..

z ....J a.. z co <l'. <l'. >-....J >-a.. 0:: 0::

<l'. <l'. ....J I- I-<l'. z z

~s w w ~ ~ <l'. <l'. I- ::::i u Q) ::::i z cr> 0:: 0::

:J E ~ <l'.

"OL61 ·~1nr LL.. (f) a..

0 I'- LL..

O'> VAO~ddV A~V1N3~Vll~Vd 0

(/)

(/) w z a.. t:= 0 <l'. ....J t:= ~ t:= ~8 w :J ~ Q)

I- z w cr> <l'. o:: E 0 0 a.. (/)

"6961 'JaqwaAON "410G a.. :J <l'.

ti ·1119 ct:5 0

A~VlN3V>lVll~Vd 1.ISOd30 w w

O'> a:l s ~~ ::::!: lD w Q) w Q)

O'> (/) cr> (/) cr> (/) E CllE <l'. (/) <l'. (/)

6961 ·~Jonuor ·1s1 D D 033:)0~d 01. lVAO~dd\f l l::lNnO::l

108

(/)

1-z w ~ :J u 0 0

t­u <l'. 0:: 1-z 0 u LL.. 0

z 0

~ 0::

~ w 0:: a..

ct:5

z t1 l-' Q) - cr> (/) 0 w-0 (/)

z 0 f= u :J 0:: I-(/)

z 0 u

cO

l-'

~~ w 0 Q) z cr> w.E I- (/)

D

C\J I'­m

0 I'-O'>

en w en

2 0 -l-o ::::> a: I-­en 2 0 (.)

c 2 <(

(!) 2 2 2

:5 0..

a: 0 u. w ~ ·

~ <( a: (!) 0 a: 0..

8.1 THE OVERALL PROGRAMME

A programme for on -go ing work, Figure 8.1, outlines the major events in planning and construction which would lead to the start of rapid transit service within five years, the shortest practicable time to complete the programme. The completion date shown is based on obtaining Parliamentary approval by July 1970, and this in turn depends on the Pr ivate Bill being submitted to Parliament by 20th November, 1969. Failure to meet this date would result in a delay of at least 12 months, since Private Bills must be presented on or before this date each year.

8.2 STAGE Ill

Stage Ill of the Manchester Rapid Transit Study is intended to prepare the necessary plans and documents to obtain statutory approvals for the construction of the first project. The work involved can be divided conveniently into three phases.

8.2.1 Functional Planning, Part 1

Th is would include the preparation of up-to-date maps, the assembly of all available data on the location of public utilities, the establishing of property requirements and similar work which would form an essential preliminary to the preparation of a Parliamentary Bill. Most of this work shou ld be complete by April 1969 in order to avoid delaying the preparation of the Bill.

A report would also be prepared, containing estimates of demand, revenue, capital and operating costs, technical details of the system to be adopted and the proposed methods of operation, in order to obtain the necessary approva ls and the funds for the project. This report would have to be complete by the end of June 1969 for the guidance of the proper authorities in making a decision on the submission of a Private Bill to Parliament in November 1969.

8.2 .2 Preparation of Parliamentary Bill

This would include drafting of the Bill, compilation of the book of reference, plans and sections, cost estimates and drafting of other statutory notiqis to meet the requirements of the 'Standing Orders of the House of Commons relating to Private Business, 1966'. One of the main tasks here would be to carry out the property search and prepare a book of reference listing the owners of affected properties, a process which could take up to six months. This work, together with the statutory specifications and advertisements, would be undertaken by the Corporation, who would also arrange for the draft of the Bill to be prepared by Parliamentary Agents.

Section eight

Programme for Future Action

The plans, book of reference and Bill would then be checked and printed. Allowing for this to be done during October and the first part of November means that the work described above would have to be complete by September 1969 and would therefore have to start no later than April.

It would be necessary to authorize submission of the Bill to Parli;;iment no later than July, 1969.

8.2.3 Functional Planning, Part 2

This would complete the functional planning for future possible extensions to the line which are not included in the first part for construction. The purpose would be to provide the local authorities with details of the right-of-way require­ments for the entire route to ensure that steps might be taken to preserve this right -of-way for the future extension of service, and to avoid conflict between it and the planning of other services along or crossing the proposed rapid transit line. This work would not be critical and would not begin before August 1969. Results would be presented by the end of 1969.

8.3 DESIGN, AND PREPARATION OF CONTRACT DOCUMENTS

In July 1969, approval of the immediate commencement of engineering design and the preparation of contract docu ­ments would be required . This approval would be necessary if tenders are to be called for the construction of the line immediately Parliamentary assent is obtained in June or July, 1970. Any delay in starting the preparation of contract documents would result in a late start on construction, and a delay in the completion of the project.

Design would be complete and contract documents issued by the end of 1971 although the supervision of construction would continue until the line is fully operational. The design and preparation of contract plans and documents for the project would have to be undertaken by a team of competent consultants, with local authority personnel contributing to the maximum degree possible. This group would be under the overall direction of the rapid transit authority, or a general consultant for the project, to ensure uniformity of design standards and co-ordination of effort. The work would include predesign and setting up of standards for equipment and materials based on the design criteria prepared as part of Stage 11 of the Study. A detailed soils investigation would also be required .

8.4 CONSTRUCTION

Construction of the recommended project (Northenden and East Didsbury to Higher Blackley) would be undertaken by dividing the work up into a number of sections.

109

The entire line cou ld be bu il t and placed in operation by 1973. For operationa l reasons it is suggested that com­mencement of operations shou ld be phased in two stages, with operation beg inning between Northenden and Victoria to be followed short ly thereafter by extens ion of service to Higher Blackley and East Didsbury. This would be of benefit in tra ining staff and in overcoming the inevitable problems wh ich occur when a new rapid transit serv ice is placed in operation.

If essential for financial reasons, the project cou ld be staged to complete only the min imum length of route for a viable operation and serv ice by the end of 1973. A first stage to meet minimum operating and service requirements would be a line between Northenden and Vi ctor ia, a distance of 6.2 miles, with a branch connection to the yard at Heaton Mersey, and a stat ion at East Didsbury. The cap ital cost for this minimum first stage wou ld be in order of £37 ,000,000 as compared to £50,000,000 for the full project as recom­mended. Construction of the line between Vi ctoria and Higher Blackley, if commenced immediately thereafter, would result in a total time of seven years to complete the project.

This first stage would meet the requirements for improved distribution in the congested Central Area and great ly improve public transport services in the major corridor of travel demand in the conurbat ion between the Central Area and Wythenshawe. It would not attract passengers from the Langley corridor, however, and thus would not take full advantage of the capita l investment in the under­ground section of route in the Central Area .

Tab le 8.1 lists the annua l construction and engineering expenditures required for 3t-year, 5-year and 7-year construct ion programmes.

11 0

These preliminary estimates include design , property pur ­chase and easements, construct ion, rolling stock, signalling and electr ical equipment. No allowance has been made for the effect of inflation.

TABLE 8.1 CAPITAL EXPENDITURE PROGRAMME

3~ YEARS 5 YEARS 7 YEARS Year £ mi ll ions £ mil lions £ mil li ons

1969 0· 3 0·2 0·2 1970 6·7 5·8 5·8 1971 15 11 11 1972 15 14 11 1973 13 13 9 1974 7 3 1975 2 4 1976 4 1977 2

50 50 50

8.5 METRICATION

The British Standards Inst ituti on has published (P.O. 6030, Feb. 1967) a programme which envisages th e change to th e metric system in the construction industry be ing effectively complete by the end of 1972, and which recom­mends that all new co ntracts started in or after 1969 shou ld be drawn up in metric units. The Stand ing Orders of the House of Commons, on the other hand, require plans an d documents submitted as part of the Private Bill to be expressed in Imperial measure.

It is therefore recommended that work forming part of Stage 111 of the study be carried out in Im per ial units, but that the engineer ing design, preparation of contract docu ­ments and all work thereafter be carried out in metri c units, in accordance w ith British Standards.

AC KNOWLEDGEMENTS

The assistance given by the following is gratefu lly

acknowledged :

The Corporation of M anchester

The Ministry of Transport

British Railways

Lond on Transport

Cheshire County Council

Lancashire County Council

Stockport Corporation

Cheadle and Gatley U.D.C.

North Western Electricity Board

Central Electricity Generating Board

North Western Gas Board

General Post Office

Disti ngton Engineering Co . Ltd .

Jas. S. Robbins and Associates

Cementation Company Ltd.

Marp les Ridgway Ltd.

Balfour Beatty & Co. Ltd .

Assoc iated Electrical Industries Group

Metropo litan Cammell Ltd .

Hawke r Siddeley Group

Westi ng house Brake and Signal Co . Ltd.

Standard Telephones and Cables Ltd .

Other orga nizations and individuals who generously provided information and assistance.

111