Proposed Woodhead Tunnel?

[IanD]

Saw this on the BBC News website:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-19799908

Peak District tunnel idea 'should be looked at'

A proposal to build a tunnel through the Peak District, linking Sheffield and Manchester, should be looked at according to the area's MP.

South Yorkshire MP Angela Smith said Barnsley businessman Tony Hickton's idea to improve transport links would need to provide value for money.

Mr Hickton said current routes between the two cities were not good enough.

He said a road and rail tunnel from around junction 36 of the M1 to the M67 would boost the economy.

'Beautiful landscape'

The Penistone and Stocksbridge Labour MP said: "The economic impact of improving the link between Sheffield and Manchester shouldn't be underestimated.

"You can't put motorways through national parks, we've got to protect those very precious landscapes.

"If you stand above the Woodhead Pass and look down on it and see all those HGVs, it's a real blight on that beautiful landscape, and anyone who uses the road knows how difficult it is to use.

"So clearly there has to be a solution somewhere along the line to this problem."

Mr Hickton, from construction inspection company Hickton, said it could be built using a mixture of private and state funding.

He added: "These tunnels won't be built tomorrow, but if we don't press the button now, we'll never be ready, so why not now?"

I'm pretty sure there used to be a couple of tunnels under the Woodhead Pass.

 

[WelshZ]

This idea is stupid. It is obvious that the local MP there does not know about a little thing called the Woodead route. where we have not one but three tunnels under the pennines, only problem being the "new" 1952 tunnel now has cables running through it for the national grid.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I think at the end of the report that NEW tunnels are being discussed, using a mixture of private and state funding.

 

[tbtc]

This idea is stupid. It is obvious that the local MP there does not know about a little thing called the Woodead route. where we have not one but three tunnels under the pennines

Trust me - Angela Smith knows all about the old Woodhead route. She was my MP (until boundary changes) and has discussed it a few times on BBC Radio Sheffield.

The interview with her (yesterday morning?) had her explaining the problems with such a plan - she has to sound broadly supportive of course as it's a big infrastructure that would relieve problems in her constituency, but she sounded suitable sceptical about any realistic chance of it happening.

 

[Cliveblackpool]

Long term planning of improving communications to Manchester etc is very important. I get the impression that the population is rapidly increasing in many cities in those areas, coupled with immigration, so planning now would be prudent. Keeping the option of the Woodhead Tunnel route is sensible long term thinking, even though the need to bring it back into service may be well over 20 years away!
I believe there should be a study of disused railways and underused ones, to decide whether to grant any long term planning that may further block or restrict certain of those routes.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Keeping the option of the Woodhead Tunnel route is sensible long term thinking, even though the need to bring it back into service may be well over 20 years away!

I am now becoming somewhat confused. I did make a posting stating that the link in the original posting referred to the construction of NEW tunnels funded by a combination of private and public funding. Then a posting was made stating the positional usage of cabling through the original Woodhead tunnels and I am unsure to which of these Woodhead Tunnel proposals is being considered in the quote from the posting above.

Are two different proposals being discussed concurrently on this thread ?

 

[Eagle]

Of course, there were once plans to reopen Woodhead as a motorway, so this is hardly a new idea...

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Of course, there were once plans to reopen Woodhead as a motorway, so this is hardly a new idea...

The M67 seems to end its short journey from the Denton interchange with the M60 in the middle of nowhere of note....leaving the residents of Tintwhistle and Hollingworth to suffer from years and years of heavy goods traffic passing through the narrow main roads in those villages.

There has always been the case put forward against a motorway passing through the Peak National Park that has had much backing by the environmentalist lobby, but even the M3 was eventually built through certain areas of great natural beauty, that were very strongly resisted for some years.

 

[HSTEd]

I would hope that any new rail route in the Woodhead Pass would be built for atleast 125mph running, but I somehow doubt that would happen.....

 

[dosxuk]

only problem being the "new" 1952 tunnel now has cables running through it for the national grid.

That's not supposed to be a problem. National Grid needed to renew the cables through the tunnels (which they own), and decided to run the new cables through the new tunnel rather than repair and refurbish the (effectively abandoned) other old tunnel.

They said several times that if the new tunnel was needed for future rail use, they would be happy to refurbish / repair the old tunnel they were previously using and install the cables back in there (almost certainly more new cable). I would imagine they would want adequate recompense for this work, but they are adamant that their current use of the new tunnel is no block on any future rail usage, and I see no reason for them to lie about it.

 

[PaxVobiscum]

...but they are adamant that their current use of the new tunnel is no block on any future rail usage...

Ho-ho.

 

[DXMachina]

I would imagine they would want adequate recompense for this work

So there'll be a charge ?

I'll get my coat

 

[D365]

The M67 seems to end its short journey from the Denton interchange with the M60 in the middle of nowhere of note....leaving the residents of Tintwhistle and Hollingworth to suffer from years and years of heavy goods traffic passing through the narrow main roads in those villages.

Did that in GCSE Geography!

I always find it annoying when disused railbeds and railway infrastructure, especially those which could be important at some time, have been built over so that it would be expensive to reopen them. Would be useful to get Woodhead back together, for either a motorway or rail.

 

[johnnychips]

Mr Hickton said current routes between the two cities were not good enough.

He said a road and rail tunnel from around junction 36 of the M1 to the M67 would boost the economy.

That suggests a new tunnel, not reusing Woodhead. That's 16 miles long!

 

[HSTEd]

An all new alignment would probably be better value for money overall, since it could be laid out for 125mph+ running from day one, and it wouldn't cost however much it would cost National Grid to move all the cables back into the old tunnels.

 

[johnnychips]

This really is pie in the sky. A road tunnel from Mottram to Tankersley, or maybe the start of the Stocksbridge by-pass; joined by rail from, I suppose somewhere near Hattersley to... er... Penistone? Or a new line into Sheffield?

If the road is not dualled to allow overtaking of lorries, it's pointless; and railtracks as well! Sixteen miles! That's two-thirds of a Channel Tunnel.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Did that in GCSE Geography!

I take it by the use of the Roman name of a settlement in your location under your avatar that Godmanchester has some significance to you. It is very many years since I sat for my GCE "O" and "A" levels (12 and 5 respectively) when the grades obtained were Credit, Pass or Distinction and no less than 46 years since I obtained my First in Mathematics at Manchester University in 1966.

I am pleased to see that specific matter formed part of your studies in Geography, but always remember that there is a human cost factor involved when large civil engineering projects that can bring a better quality of life, such as the hoped-for but as yet unfulfilled traffic reduction, are delayed for whatsoever is deemed to be a reason. I cited the heavy goods vehicle traffic through two villages that has been continuing for very many years, as a prime example of this in an earlier posting on this thread.

 

[IanD]

That suggests a new tunnel, not reusing Woodhead. That's 16 miles long!

When they've finished using them for the East West Oxford Cambridge Rail link, they could reuse the Crossrail TBMs

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?p=1225736#post1225736

 

[tbtc]

That suggests a new tunnel, not reusing Woodhead. That's 16 miles long!

On Radio Sheffield it was suggested that it'd be a tunnel from the Flouch to somewhere on the western side of the hills (rather than all the way from the M1.

The Stocksbridge bypass has a history of accidents though, so anything to reduce the reliance on it (and all the heavy traffic through Midhope/ Langsett etc) would be welcomed.

I would hope that any new rail route in the Woodhead Pass would be built for atleast 125mph running, but I somehow doubt that would happen.....

An all new alignment would probably be better value for money overall, since it could be laid out for 125mph+ running from day one, and it wouldn't cost however much it would cost National Grid to move all the cables back into the old tunnels.

No mention of Shinkansen?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

The Stocksbridge bypass has a history of accidents though, so anything to reduce the reliance on it (and all the heavy traffic through Midhope/ Langsett etc) would be welccomed

On the M62, has there been many HGV accidents between junctions 22 and 23, that crosses high terrain, in recent years ?

 

[tbtc]

On the M62, has there been many HGV accidents between junctions 22 and 23, that crosses high terrain, in recent years ?

I've no idea - is this a rhetorical question?

The problem with the Stocksbridge bypass isn't height, it's the many changes from one lane to two (without a central reservation) with "crawler" lanes etc, which seems to encourage motorists to overtake where it's not really safe to do so (especially when going back down from two lanes to one).

 

[johnnychips]

On Radio Sheffield it was suggested that it'd be a tunnel from the Flouch to somewhere on the western side of the hills (rather than all the way from the M1.

As Paul S said, the greatest congestion occurs at the western end, namely the villages of Tintwistle, Hollingworth and Mottram. Sure it's not wonderful driving over the high parts stuck behind lorries, but it is acceptable. The by-pass round these villages has long been proposed, but was rejected on cost and some environmental grounds. There is still a campaign to build it.

One of the more bizarre proposals to alleviate the traffic was that lorries should exit the M67 and drive to Hattersley, where in a channel-tunnel style operation, they would drive on a train, which would take them on the newly rebuilt railway to somewhere near Stocksbridge, where there would be a similar set-up.

The 'sixteen miles' I've measured comes from the article saying the tunnel should be from J36 on the M1 to the M67. Perhaps the author wasn't listening properly. As I said, whatever the length of tunnel, it is pointless unless those villages are bypassed, apart from probably reducing the number of days the road would be closed by snow.

 

[HSTEd]

No mention of Shinkansen?

Well ideallly it would be part of a Midland Shinkansen

But there are no people of vision in government :P

 

[ainsworth74]

But there are no people of vision in government

HSTEd for Transport Secretary!

 

[tbtc]

As Paul S said, the greatest congestion occurs at the western end, namely the villages of Tintwistle, Hollingworth and Mottram. Sure it's not wonderful driving over the high parts stuck behind lorries, but it is acceptable. The by-pass round these villages has long been proposed, but was rejected on cost and some environmental grounds. There is still a campaign to build it

The problem is that we either solve the whole problem (getting traffic from the M1 to the M67 without single carriageways/ going directly through villages) or not at all.

By-passing one bit just pushes the congestion marginally further along the road - we either tackle the whole thing (on a "national" level) or leave it alone.

 

[Eagle]

The problem is that we either solve the whole problem (getting traffic from the M1 to the M67 without single carriageways/ going directly through villages) or not at all.

It might take a while, given how long it's taken to get confirmation of an upgrade of four miles of single-carriageway unbypassed A556, which also happens to be the main road between Manchester and the southern M6. Confirmed in 2010, current estimated opening for that road is 2017—forty-odd years too late IMO.

 

[tbtc]

It might take a while, given how long it's taken to get confirmation of an upgrade of four miles of single-carriageway unbypassed A556, which also happens to be the main road between Manchester and the southern M6. Confirmed in 2010, current estimated opening for that road is 2017—forty-odd years too late IMO.

Realistically I can't see the Woodhead situation changing in the next couple of decades. Traffic from Sheffield (and Nottingham etc) to Manchester (and Liverpool etc) either negotiates the twisting single carriage routes over the hills (A57 or A628) or it goes up to the M62/ M1 junction (in the case of bigger lorries).

Sheffield to Manchester would be a great market for rail to exploit (considering how bad the roads are between the two), yet the capacity is only a few coaches an hour (partly due to the need for freight paths in the Hope Valley and the fact that the Woodhead route was closed).

Am not hopefull of much changing!

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

It might take a while, given how long it's taken to get confirmation of an upgrade of four miles of single-carriageway unbypassed A556, which also happens to be the main road between Manchester and the southern M6. Confirmed in 2010, current estimated opening for that road is 2017—forty-odd years too late IMO.

Yet an new continuation of the A34 by-pass system from its original terminal situation of Wilmslow South through from there to Nether Alderley near to the Astra Zeneca site at a very high level financial cost of civil engineering with a new rail overbridge and a number of new road overbridges, appeared to have been constructed within a short period of time. Would the fact that George Osborne has his constituency in that particular region have had anything to do with this ?

Howsoever, the final extension of the A555 from Handforth to Manchester Airport as part of the SEMMS project scheme receiving two cancellations of project commencement seems to be a better comparison to the A556 new relief road tardiness, as described in your posting.

 

[tirphil]

The Alderley Edge by pass was constructed rather quickly I suppose but it was first mooted in the 1930's!!

The sale catalogue for the Stanley Estate shows a route for a new road which follows broadly the route of the current by pass.

I think the Stanley Estate was sold in 1938.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

The Alderley Edge by pass was constructed rather quickly I suppose but it was first mooted in the 1930's!!

The sale catalogue for the Stanley Estate shows a route for a new road which follows broadly the route of the current by pass.

I think the Stanley Estate was sold in 1938.

As one resident in that general area, I am well aware of local history historical proposals, but my reference did in fact refer to the continuation of the A34 Cheadle Royal to Wilmslow South new road at the roundabout connection (why oh why not a flyover with slip road access and egress) to the new Wilmslow South to Nether Alderley continuation of that self-same A34 new routing.