Manchester United’s rail freight dilemma

[lachlan]

I can't see a heavy rail station being a priority now there's the Metrolink stop at Wharfside. A small batch of additional trams to help move post-match crowds more quickly could be better value and those vehicles would be able to help all over the system at other times. A new stadium immediately to the west would probably take part of the container stacking yard of the Freightliner terminal. The club's parking land use is inefficient with large surface lots surrounding the stadium. If parking was more centralised in a multi-level facility on one of the other existing sites, the W3 and N3 car parks along the banks of the Bridgewater canal adjacent to the terminal could be offered in compensation to Freightliner to offset any capacity reductions.
View attachment 161145

Could the Trafford Centre trams be extended to run to Piccadilly? This would offer the same connectivity that a new station would.

 

[HSTEd]

Could the Trafford Centre trams be extended to run to Piccadilly? This would offer the same connectivity that a new station would.

There are serious capacity issues through the Deansgate-Castlefield and done to St Peter's Square, which is why they don't already do this.

And if heavy rail isn't going to be able to cope with matchday traffic then a tram has absolutely no chance.

 

[GingerSte]

But that's exactly the problem.

Building an entire new station for huge crowds on perhaps 40-50 days of the year simply doesn't make sense.

Add in that the requirements of SkyTV means kick-off times will vary and that this extra traffic will feed into the Castlefield Corridor.

As I often say to reopening enthusiasts, "show me the timetable". Not in minute detail, but how do you propose to move 10, 15, 20k people in an hour?

And - frankly - the industrial and commercial needs of the region are more important than football.

I would argue that Salford Quays is close enough that a station at Old Trafford would see commuter traffic from there during the week. Especially from passengers from Warrington (and beyond) who wouldn't need to travel to Deansgate and then walk / tram it out of the city again.

As far as the traffic before and after matches is concerned, I would be diverting some/all of the Castlefield services from Wigan, Bolton, Preston etc into Victoria for that short portion of the week, to make the room.

If the freight terminals were also to remain, I would see if access could be provided to these from the west (not necessarily during match days - more generally).

 

[Meerkat]

The answer is clearly for the Warrington line to branch off underground via Old Trafford, Salford Crescent, Victoria, Piccadilly, Etihad, and out to join the eastern suburban line at Groton.
Cost estimate to follow once I have bought a calculator with enough digits.

 

[6Gman]

I would argue that Salford Quays is close enough that a station at Old Trafford would see commuter traffic from there during the week. Especially from passengers from Warrington (and beyond) who wouldn't need to travel to Deansgate and then walk / tram it out of the city again.

As far as the traffic before and after matches is concerned, I would be diverting some/all of the Castlefield services from Wigan, Bolton, Preston etc into Victoria for that short portion of the week, to make the room.

If the freight terminals were also to remain, I would see if access could be provided to these from the west (not necessarily during match days - more generally).

That might have worked when matches were mostly 3pm on a Saturday. Since they are now various times on various days the disruption would be significant.

And doesn't provide the stock.

 

[MarkyT]

I would argue that Salford Quays is close enough that a station at Old Trafford would see commuter traffic from there during the week. Especially from passengers from Warrington (and beyond) who wouldn't need to travel to Deansgate and then walk / tram it out of the city again.

Yes but it really needs to be closer to the ship canal for that. Imperial War Museum is already well placed for the Quays and Media City via the two footbridges.

If the freight terminals were also to remain, I would see if access could be provided to these from the west (not necessarily during match days - more generally).

Definitely. A connection at Warrington might be possible as shown here in magenta. a new link partly following the old CLC bypass lines avoiding Central station with a new chord diverging from the WCML next to the old Darnall freight terminal. The CLC east of here would be electrified to Trafford. A west end connection into the yard at Trafford should work or the trains could set back in from east of the existing yard junction.

Setting back in from the east of the existing yard junction is not ideal due to the time taken and conflict with passenger traffic, hence my related concept to make the regular local CLC service to Warrington a dual voltage Metrolink tram-train. allowing the passenger services to be diverted, removing these conflicts. My scheme would give freights almost exclusive access to the existing running lines passing the terminals and stadium, so allowing them to both be used as headshunts for full ~800m trains to draw forward then set back in portions to the crane roads of both terminals. There might even be space for a four track yard here as the formation is wide enough for that, even under the big Trafford roundabout bridges on the A56. The existing line would still be kept onwards to Castleford Junction, but it would remain an alternative diversionary route for freight as well as other passenger services rather than being used regularly. There might be a handful of freights for the terminals that simply cannot run in from the west so those might still need to go via the corridor of doom routinely, but I'd expect the majority of long distance traffic from the south is likely to be able to be routed via Warrington.

The tram-trains would leave the existing route just after Trafford Park station and take a new route as shown here in cyan, joining the existing Metrolink Trafford route just east of Imperial War Musem. A new station would be constructed on a stretch of unused land between Wharfside Way and Trafford Wharf Road which, with exits to each, could be convenient for the Quays and Media City as well as the Stadium. I also suggest another new stop at Europa Gate for access to employment in the area.

Returning to Warrington, between the Ship Canal and Mersey bridges, a grade separated junction might be plausible south of the Warrington Bank Quay station to allow a down fast freight train to diverge and pass under the up fast to reach the east side of the station with minimal conflict. The new track connection would pass under a new elevated up fast alignment. This would place the freight on the correct side to diverge for Manchester north of Bank Quay.

 

[Howardh]

If the new stadium is built, what will happen to the land that the current stadium occupies? I presume it won't be used for football as a smaller venue, I expect more hotels, car parks and so on. But if City have the coop arena close by, won't ManU want the same?

 

[HSTEd]

If the new stadium is built, what will happen to the land that the current stadium occupies? I presume it won't be used for football as a smaller venue, I expect more hotels, car parks and so on. But if City have the coop arena close by, won't ManU want the same?

A lot of the current site would probably end up under auxiliary facilities for the new stadium, depending on just how large it is.

 

[MarkyT]

A lot of the current site would probably end up under auxiliary facilities for the new stadium, depending on just how large it is.

I expect they'll make the megastore merch shop even bigger! A multi-level parking structure might make sense at that end of the site, though more likely on the awkwardly shaped E2 parking lot where an exit flyover from an upper floor across the A5081 might be possible, allowing right turns straight out onto the A56 roundabout. The old stadium and N2 parking lots I have shown as 'Unspecified football related development'. This has potential for canalside hospitality etc.

 

[Grimsby town]

If the new stadium is built, what will happen to the land that the current stadium occupies? I presume it won't be used for football as a smaller venue, I expect more hotels, car parks and so on. But if City have the coop arena close by, won't ManU want the same?

It should be given over to housing. The area has great connectivity and is the perfect place for significant housing developments that are already occurring. Look at Wembley to see what can be achieved in terms of mixed use development.

I predict that the whole of Trafford Park will gradually move over to housing development. A former colleague of mine did some analysis that showed that the area is best suited to housing rather than logistics. As land values increase, the incentives to redevelop will increase. Looking at moving the freight yard to somewhere more suitable is a must.

The answer is clearly for the Warrington line to branch off underground via Old Trafford, Salford Crescent, Victoria, Piccadilly, Etihad, and out to join the eastern suburban line at Groton.
Cost estimate to follow once I have bought a calculator with enough digits.

Without massively going off topic, I'll point to the fact TfGMs analysis suggested this should be looked at. Again if development is going to be facilitated in this area, then the transport system is going to need significantly more capacity. That's going to require go underground one way or another. Be that lines that take the express services off the existing lines or new lines for local services.

 

[gg1]

Not needed, there's already a "Wembley of the north"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vale_Park

Following the club being informed that they would be evicted from The Old Recreation Ground by Stoke-on-Trent City Council, plans for a new stadium in a new area began. In 1944 Hamil Road – the site of a former clay pit – was chosen, a site opposite Burslem Park, where the club had played its football in the early years of its existence. The development became known as The Wembley of the North due to the planned size of the stadium, plans which included an 80,000 capacity with room for 1,000 parked cars.

 

[Bartsimho]

Flattening the stadium and making an extra big freight terminal sounds good to me!

This the "people should work for the railway not the railway work for people" again

Alternatively you could build an entirely new stadium at Port Salford (alongside the A J Bell rugby ground) and extend the Metrolink Trafford Centre line to serve it. Direct access from the M60 too. One of the many problems of rebuilding Old Trafford is that it is tightly constrained by the CLC line on one side.

Too far away really and so much brand in "Old Trafford" it's be unthinkable

Not needed, there's already a "Wembley of the north"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vale_Park

With all the dodgy crime as well in the local area already. And clearly some people had been taking the good stuff to come up with that idea

 

[GingerSte]

Yes but it really needs to be closer to the ship canal for that. Imperial War Museum is already well placed for the Quays and Media City via the two footbridges.

...

I would have it closer than (I think) you're suggesting. Basically I would have the platforms as the yellow rectangles shown below. This would put it approx 1/4 mile from the edge of the Salford Quays area.

(To be clear, I'm talking a National Rail connection rather than a Metrolink one.)

That might have worked when matches were mostly 3pm on a Saturday. Since they are now various times on various days the disruption would be significant.

And doesn't provide the stock.

The vast majority of the time, matches start and finish outside of commuter rush hours. Even weekday matches tend to kick off after 19:30. That would minimise the disruption for commuter travellers at least. It would also mean that some of the stock used to bolster commuter services could be used for the football services. It might require a more flexible / customer-focused railway, but I think that's needed anyway.

 

[HSTEd]

I'd think that, if you were going to do this, you'd want an island, using as much width as can be scraped up.

Loadings on the platforms are likely to be highly asymmetric, so an island would increase the effective circulating space by making all space available to both directions.

It's hard to find photos of the view from the platforms but the bridges look pretty wide, so there might be room for a slew.

 

[jh64]

This the "people should work for the railway not the railway work for people" again

It's a 'People should not work for Man U' thing.

 

[MarkyT]

The answer is clearly for the Warrington line to branch off underground via Old Trafford, Salford Crescent, Victoria, Piccadilly, Etihad, and out to join the eastern suburban line at Groton.
Cost estimate to follow once I have bought a calculator with enough digits.

Without massively going off topic, I'll point to the fact TfGMs analysis suggested this should be looked at. Again if development is going to be facilitated in this area, then the transport system is going to need significantly more capacity. That's going to require go underground one way or another. Be that lines that take the express services off the existing lines or new lines for local services.

I suggest something like this, with links from Eccles and Warrington:


This would use immersed tube technology to cross the canal and docks with a Canary Wharf EL-style Salford Quays station in Ontario Basin, temporarily drained for construction and used as a launch pit for a bored tunnel of around 1.6km under Ordsall, emerging to join the Victoria corridor after a station in a trench under the Regent Retail Park with platforms nearby on the surface lines for interchange. this would eliminate flat junction conflicts between stopping metro trains using the new connection and north-south axis trains using the Castlefield corridor.

It should be given over to housing. The area has great connectivity and is the perfect place for significant housing developments that are already occurring. Look at Wembley to see what can be achieved in terms of mixed use development.

I predict that the whole of Trafford Park will gradually move over to housing development. A former colleague of mine did some analysis that showed that the area is best suited to housing rather than logistics. As land values increase, the incentives to redevelop will increase. Looking at moving the freight yard to somewhere more suitable is a must.

While they're still situated adjacent to the largest industrial estate in Europe I think the terminals will stay. The biggest problem they face is the rail access route through the Castlefield corridor. That's an accident of history due to the terminals only really becoming busy after alternatives had already been removed at a time passenger rail usage was at a nadir. The subsequent stellar growth in passenger services has led to the capacity and performance difficulties. My solution for a western freight approach via a new connection at Warrington might help solve that potentially. As to the rest of Trafford Park, I agree denser mixed residential/commercial use will inevitably gradually take over slowly from east end though I doubt it will ever completely subsume all industrial and logistics uses throughout the estate. It doesn't make sense to spread all factories and warehouses as far away as possible, as that just means more trucks having to come back into the city centre for distribution and more difficult journeys to work for people employed at these remote locations, who often need to use a personal car that if they still live in the city they need to park near home and causes more city traffic congestion en route to work. If all new industrial estates had to have reliable, cheap and frequent long hours bus connections to their nearest towns and major transport interchanges, that might become more acceptable.

 

[Grimsby town]

I suggest something like this, with links from Eccles and Warrington:
View attachment 161186

This would use immersed tube technology to cross the canal and docks with a Canary Wharf EL-style Salford Quays station in Ontario Basin, temporarily drained for construction and used as a launch pit for a bored tunnel of around 1.6km under Ordsall, emerging to join the Victoria corridor after a station in a trench under the Regent Retail Park with platforms nearby on the surface lines for interchange. this would eliminate flat junction conflicts between stopping metro trains using the new connection and north-south axis trains using the Castlefield

I agree with some of the station placements but I imagine it would have to be used for a lot more local services to be viable and cross more of the city than just Victoria. Otherwise you'll end up creating another bottleneck at Victoria.

My solution for a western freight approach via a new connection at Warrington might help solve that potentially. As to the rest of Trafford Park, I agree denser mixed residential/commercial use will inevitably gradually take over slowly from east end though I doubt it will ever completely subsume all industrial and logistics uses throughout the estate. It doesn't make sense to spread all factories and warehouses as far away as possible, as that just means more trucks having to come back into the city centre for distribution and more difficult journeys to work for people employed at these remote locations, who often need to use a personal car that if they still live in the city they need to park near home and causes more city traffic congestion en route to work. If all new industrial estates had to have reliable, cheap and frequent long hours bus connections to their nearest towns and major transport interchanges, that might become more acceptable.

I think some sort of western connection would be needed. I doubt all logistics will be removed either, but logistics takes up a lot of land compared to the number of people employed. The number of trips produced to an industrial estate will be far lower than those produced by a housing estate, so it's more important to prioritise housing in accessible places like the area around Old Trafford. I doubt moving logistics closer to the M60 would have a huge impact on overall travel or the number of vehicles going into the city centre. Building houses on motorway junctions certainly will increase car usage though.

 

[Chester1]

Don't the football club already own it?

When the 'Wembley of the North' idea emerged recently I went on the Redcafe site to check out the discussion. Someone on there posted a link to an ownership map that indicated that the club's owners controlled pretty much all land around the existing stadium, including the freight terminal.

Perhaps a United fan could confirm whether this is still the case?

No they don’t. The suggested locations of a new stadium circulating online would require purchasing the freight terminal or at least part of it. The club owns the stadium and the car parks. They own a lot of land but unless they try to build on top of the Bridgewater canal they cannot fit a new stadium in without buying more land or doing a Tottenham (the footprints of the old and new White Hart Lane overlap).

 

[Dr Hoo]

Not being a Mancunian and not being interested in football makes it easy to imagine a ‘clean sheet’ approach.
How about demolishing a suitably-sized swathe of the City Centre; dig a massive hole for Andy Burnham’s super sub-surface combined HS2 and NPR station, with new underground local rail and tram lines in all relevant directions; put a sub-surface football stadium on top with artificial turf and then skyscraper residential, business and educational blocks on top to defray the cost? Zero car parking provision.
Leave the Castlefield Corridor as a freight-only line and, after demolishing the current football ground once the new facilities are ready, extend the rail freight complex over the vacant site to facilitate massive modal shift from road.
Dilemma avoided. Co-existence enabled. Fit for the future, post 2050.

 

[matacaster]

Ground share with Man City at the Etihad?

 

[USRailFan]

Ground share with Man City at the Etihad?

I'm not sure the current German government would be willing to bomb Old Trafford...

 

[mrcheek]

I'm not sure the current German government would be willing to bomb Old Trafford...

Took me a moment to work that one out. Very good!

Of course, the new ground will have to have a capacity of at least 82,000, since United's current attendance record is just below that, and was at Maine Road after the war.

 

[The Planner]

Took me a moment to work that one out. Very good!

Of course, the new ground will have to have a capacity of at least 82,000, since United's current attendance record is just below that, and was at Maine Road after the war.

It doesn't or Wembley would have been built for 126,000 following that logic.

 

[mrcheek]

It doesn't or Wembley would have been built for 126,000 following that logic.

126.000 would not be practical. 82,000 is. Im pretty sure as Jim Ratcliffe will have that as his minimum capacity figure

 

[The Planner]

126.000 would not be practical. 82,000 is. Im pretty sure as Jim Ratcliffe will have that as his minimum capacity figure

But you said it had to be 82000 as that was their record attendance, so therefore Wembley should have been 126,000. Considering Everton are building to 53000 when their record attendance is 78,000, Arsenal built to 60000 when their record is 73000, there is no correlation, but this is off topic.

 

[mrcheek]

But you said it had to be 82000 as that was their record attendance, so therefore Wembley should have been 126,000. Considering Everton are building to 53000 when their record attendance is 78,000, Arsenal built to 60000 when their record is 73000, there is no correlation, but this is off topic.

Sorry, I obviously didnt make the point clear.

It is a constant embarrassment to Manchester United fans that their record home attendance (a smidge under 82,000) actually came in a match played at Maine Road, home of Manchester City, which they used after the war due to severe bomb damage to Old Trafford.
They need to make sure the record is at their proper home! So the new stadium will have to be at least 82,000

 

[JamesT]

Old Trafford's current capacity is 74,300. The average league attendance last season was 73,500, i.e. they're pretty much full every match. I doubt they particularly care about the record home attendance from back in the standing era, but certainly increasing capacity would seem extremely likely for a new stadium.

 

[HSTEd]

Manchester United would probably love to have a stadium of comparable scale to Camp Nou (~100,000), although that might not be very practical.

But I imagine they'd certainly want more than 80k

 

[sprunt]

It is a constant embarrassment to Manchester United fans that their record home attendance (a smidge under 82,000) actually came in a match played at Maine Road, home of Manchester City, which they used after the war due to severe bomb damage to Old Trafford.

No it isn't. It's not even an occasional topic of discussion. City fans probably wang on about it all the time though.

 

[Topological]

A bigger emphasis for stadium size would be staying bigger than the Etihad?

It is good to see some of the more ambitious plans for rail connectivity that can result from rethinking the Old Trafford Stadium area of the CLC. Hopefully the powers that be in Manchester are also being so creative.

The biggest thing with football stadia is the amount of "space" there is below the seating bowl after the normal circulation spaces have been accounted for. Maybe solutions for the transport can start to make use of some of that volume too. Waiting areas for matchday crowds within the space under the stands has sense to it (Note that this is not space separate from the normal circulation)