Close Deansgate station?

[Bletchleyite]

Slightly off topic but would closing Deansgate permanently help or hinder things with the new planned layout? I have often wondered are two stations with in a stones throw of each other really needed?

This was proposed a while back. However I think it was part of a proposal which would have seen the Oxford Road platforms extended westwards rather than within the current site, and involved providing some sort of high level walkway to Deansgate? Does anyone recall (or wish to propose) more?

 

[Krokodil]

Good point, in December Deansgate is often closed due to congestion, Xmas markets etc, so when Oxford Road closes Deansgate is an obvious alternative yet these closures are proof it can't handle huge crowds?

Therefore both could be closed at some point!

None of the three stations can handle large crowds, I've seen the island at Oxford Road closed off during disruption to avoid crowding, and I'm sure that we're all familiar with the various measures on the Piccadilly island to prevent that being overwhelmed.

Deansgate is handy for tram connections. I wonder if the overcrowding on event days would be less of an issue if there was a more regular service to mop up the crowds.

Alternatively what about an interchange at Cornbrook to allow CLC passengers to join Metrolink there?

 

[cle]

At the western end, you'd need a pretty hefty walkway to connect to the 'GMEX' Met platforms (up across the Locks!) and to reach Deansgate itself - - - - might be too difficult.

Trains aren't all that long - we're not talking Crossrail double-ending here (plus the weather) - the average is probably 4 cars.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Trains aren't all that long - we're not talking Crossrail double-ending here (plus the weather) - the average is probably 4 cars.

6x24m is the longest you normally get at Deansgate (the Blackpool service). Oxford Road is being designed for 200m (ish) TPE trains which will be the norm post electrification.

 

[Winthorpe]

Of the two stations, if there were enough room to develop Deansgate station (I don't think there is), it would be better to close Oxford Road and keep Deansgate.

Why? Think of a Deansgate station developed in the direction of Oxford Road. That would enable new access to be built into First Street (so access towards the universities) and Whitworth Street West (access for people heading to city centre offices, including on Oxford Street).

 

[Fokx]

Rather than close Deansgate permanently (Unless a Cornbrook interchange was possible on the CLC), I’d propose a reduction in service calls at all three stations. For example rather having the Blackpool and Liverpool services call at Deansgate, Oxford Rd and Piccadilly, they’d call at a combination of either Deansgate and Piccadilly or Oxford Rd and Piccadilly, or even just one of the latter. (The CLC service picking up Deansgate and Oxford Rd).

I’d also like to see services such as the TPE Anglo-Scottish and Redcar, alongside the likes of Northern’s Barrow and TFW’s North Wales service call at one of the stations rather than both Piccadilly and Oxford Rd in a bid to reduce separate dwell times. The TPE Anglo-Scottish service frequently arrives at Oxford Rd with passengers still trying to manage luggage and finding their seat whilst passengers from the Airport are trying to alight which increases dwell Northbound

 

[Bletchleyite]

While in the past intercity services didn't call at Oxford Road due to their length, this proposal to complicate the timetable with skip-stop arrangements is a really bad idea as it would just confuse the life out of people.

 

[Kite159]

So close the station which offers connection to the majority of tram services with customers being expected to either walk from Oxford Road or change at Piccadilly and potentially change again as Piccadilly doesn't have all destinations.

 

[deltic]

Cant be many proposals to close a station that handles over a 1m passengers a year

 

[Bletchleyite]

Cant be many proposals to close a station that handles over a 1m passengers a year

Kings Cross Thameslink was closed and is probably a similar distance from the current station as Deansgate is from Oxford Road.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

I’d propose a reduction in service calls at all three stations. For example rather having the Blackpool and Liverpool services call at Deansgate, Oxford Rd and Piccadilly, they’d call at a combination of either Deansgate and Piccadilly or Oxford Rd and Piccadilly, or even just one of the latter. (The CLC service picking up Deansgate and Oxford Rd).

That seems worthy of further investigation imho as it would not cost any money.

 

[cactustwirly]

Kings Cross Thameslink was closed and is probably a similar distance from the current station as Deansgate is from Oxford Road.

That's different as it was moved to St Pancras

 

[Bletchleyite]

That seems worthy of further investigation imho as it would not cost any money.

It really doesn't, because it'd be complex and confusing.

 

[brad465]

Kings Cross Thameslink was closed and is probably a similar distance from the current station as Deansgate is from Oxford Road.

Rochester likewise, but in both cases they were replaced by a more convenient alternative, not closed outright.

 

[cle]

They were replaced.

It’s not a serious suggestion and far more passengers get off at Oxford Road and walk, than get off at Deansgate and connect to a tram.

Both are viable, and ideally all trains would call at all.

 

[The Planner]

Cant be many proposals to close a station that handles over a 1m passengers a year

Surprised no one has actually asked the question of how you deal with those 1m displaced passenger movements. How many of those will be lost from the railway and how many will migrate to Oxford Road or somewhere else.

 

[mike57]

I agree that Deansgate and Oxford Road are too close together. The problem is that everything is hemmed in, and immediately west of Deansgate you have the first of the various flat junctions that are the source of a lot conflicts.

I believe the Deansgate station buildings are listed and possibly the station buildings at Oxford Road. So the whole lot is set in the way it was when built, with very little opportunity to redevelop unless you just say "OK they maybe listed, but they are in the way and a proper 21st century railway is needed with capacity to meet current and future demands so they have to go." You then have the old rail infrastructure into Central, which is now used by the trams.

The Ordsal chord actually made things worse.

Put simply its a mess which picking around the edges of will not sort out, it will just move the pinch points.

Seeing as this is speculative discussion, the ideal solution:

A proper 4/5 track railway from west of Deansgate all the way through to Piccadilly, Deansgate station completely redeveloped and extended east to handle longer trains. Oxford Road closes. The viaducts carrying the trams are demolished to create space and a new purpose built one is constructed specifically for trams, which can use tramway gradients and curves to provide easy interchange at the redeveloped Deansgate, which then has 4/5 platforms. Then 2 more through platforms at Piccadilly to the south, with 13/14 also moved south to create a larger 13/14 platform area. The area over the taxi rank and the old 13/14 area built over to create some westbound facing bays for terminating services, or alternatively use the old Mayfield site for some westbound bays. Possibly create a Deansgate - Picc tram link parallel to the railway, with Oxford Road and and one or more intermediate stops on the way to Pic, merging with the tracks that emerge from under Piccadilly **Edit**: Provide a grade separated junction at the throat of Piccadilly to allow services emerging from Castlefield to join the required route with out conflict

Reconstruct the Ordsal chord Picc to Vic track to be grade separated, the 'inner' leg is fine, but the outer one would then be at current tram level over the junctions and fly over all the other lines to 'land' into Platform 4 at Vic.

Tell all the NIMBYists and the 'cant do that' brigade that its needed to support the wider development of the North of England, and its happening. Ensure that these same people cant bog it down in legal challenges, by a change in the law if need be to exclude essential infrastructure projects from a lot of red tape and restrictions.

How much would all this cost, I have no idea, but obviously a massive number.

Would any goverment have the foresight and conviction to carry it through, very doubtfull

However the end result would allow the services that are needed to be run in more reliable way with space for additional services. A 50 year plus solution.

 

[jfollows]

Oxford Road definitely listed, see https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...remodelling-scheme.280450/page-2#post-7127653

 

[Bletchleyite]

Seeing as this is speculative discussion, the ideal solution:

I think if we were going to go pie in the sky, what I'd actually do is not blight central Manchester with a 5-track above ground railway, rather I'd put the long distance stuff underground by building NPR properly and turn Castlefield into something more like Merseyrail, with uniform length (probably 6 x 24m) trains on all-stations urban stopping services designed for capacity and frequency. Aside from Liverpool Central being a bit busy, that works fine on a two track railway, I've never heard anyone suggesting that Sandhills-Brunswick should be quadded, yet that carries 12tph in each direction and the single Loop track carries 14.

There does exist the other option of doing that anyway and sending all the long distance stuff to an expanded Victoria, I suppose.

Oxford Road definitely listed, see https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...remodelling-scheme.280450/page-2#post-7127653

Oxford Road is certainly listed, but that doesn't mean you can't stop it being a railway station or reduce its service, it just means the building itself must be preserved and changes made to it have to have permission. Listing a building doesn't require a business that is in it at the time of listing to continue - indeed you can probably see why that would be impossible.

The original street level building at Deansgate probably is listed, but the platform level structures are 1980s-90s (and ugly as sin with no architectural merit at all) so I'd not worry about that.

 

[Krokodil]

It’s not a serious suggestion and far more passengers get off at Oxford Road and walk, than get off at Deansgate and connect to a tram.

I wonder how different the figures would be if all trains stopped at all stations.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 Jan 2025 ==

Surprised no one has actually asked the question of how you deal with those 1m displaced passenger movements. How many of those will be lost from the railway and how many will migrate to Oxford Road or somewhere else.

Something will have to be done as Piccadilly's island platform will never cope with the displaced passengers.

 

[biggerisbetter]

I would agree with the closure of Deansgate but only as part of a wider improvement of the Castlefield corridor:

1. Build Piccadilly platforms 15 and 16
2. Redevelop Oxford Road station to provide 4 longer through platforms as originally proposed but also with a new western entrance adjacent to First Street and either with an elevated walkway along the north of the rail viaduct then a diagonal bridge linking to Deansgate-Castlefield Metrolink stop adjacent to the substation, or, if the walkway is not feasible, provision of a further lift serving the Metrolink stop at the eastern end adjacent to the stairs and sub-station.
3. Build platforms 3-5 at Salford Central
4. Build 1 or 2 further platforms at Salford Crescent
5. Relocate Trafford Park freight terminals to Parkside

Post the above, introduce more standard stopping patterns and destinations for services - such as all Southport services going to Victoria but every service passing through Manchester should stop at every station to maximise capacity and improve resilience.

I would save the tunnels for HS2/NPR and a tram-train metro.

 

[cle]

I would agree with the closure of Deansgate but only as part of a wider improvement of the Castlefield corridor:

1. Build Piccadilly platforms 15 and 16
2. Redevelop Oxford Road station to provide 4 longer through platforms as originally proposed but also with a new western entrance adjacent to First Street and either with an elevated walkway along the north of the rail viaduct then a diagonal bridge linking to Deansgate-Castlefield Metrolink stop adjacent to the substation, or, if the walkway is not feasible, provision of a further lift serving the Metrolink stop at the eastern end adjacent to the stairs and sub-station.
3. Build platforms 3-5 at Salford Central
4. Build 1 or 2 further platforms at Salford Crescent
5. Relocate Trafford Park freight terminals to Parkside

Post the above, introduce more standard stopping patterns and destinations for services - such as all Southport services going to Victoria but every service passing through Manchester should stop at every station to maximise capacity and improve resilience.

I would save the tunnels for HS2/NPR and a tram-train metro.

Agree with all of this. Salford Central would be a huge help, and everything should call there (and Oxford Road) - Crescent, possibly not re Scotland services. Others, yes.

If Oxford Road couldn't have two islands (four tracks), then at least a Spanish third one would be helpful - especially if P15/16 happened, and maybe things can turn at Piccadilly also/instead.