cropper's column
Page 52
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Road transport needs Channel bridge cum tunnel
• The channel tunnel project is far from dead. The Government is expected to make a pronouncement soon. Those of us who know the potentialities of road transport, particularly for freight, shudder at the thought of a rail-only tunnel; will the enormous costs secure an economic return Yet to make a permanent crossing route for road vehicles is beset with great difficulties. A tunnel offers almost insoluble problems of ventilation as well as serious risks caused by blockages. A bridge needs to be so high in order to be clear of shipping that it becomes a hazard for vehicles crossing it, a major maintenance problem, as well as an obstruction and danger to shipping. For these reasons and others. both have been ruled out, without any scope for counter-argument.
It amazes me that more attention has not been given to a project for a bridge and tunnel combination. One such scheme was seriously put forward in considerable detail in The Consulting Engineer (Dec/Jan 68/691. The simplest way of grasping its conception is to understand that the crossing would be in five sections: (1) We would start from Folkestone on a low-level bridge for some six miles: (2) by a spiral decline, we would descend to a tunnel lying on the sea-bed and travel on that for some five miles; (3) by another spiral incline we would ascend above the sea and make use of a bridge for a further five miles; (4) once again by spiral decline down to the sea-bed for another section in tunnel for five more miles: (5) then up by the fourth spiral above sea level to make the final section an a bridge to Cap Gris-Nez For the 500 ships which daily pass through the Channel, this scheme would provide a means of enforcing the proposal for shipping lanes, with west-bound and east-bound ships travelling respectively over a different tunnel section. For the central bridge section, it is proposed to make use of shallows which already exist in the middle of the Channel: the Varne and Le Colbart banks have soundings as little as 3 fathoms, are already marked with buoys and lightships, and are a navigational hazard. The three bridge sections do not require to be at high level, as they only need to allow passage for small coastal craft; this will reduce both constructional and maintenance costs.
The figure for the constructional costs for the scheme (1968 prices) is set at £171 millions. This is compared with £141m (1963 prices) for the tunnel, and £351m for the high-level bridge.
The scheme is worked out on the basis of a six-lane highway. Because of the alternation between tunnel and bridge, it is argued that it will not cause any strain on motorists and lorry drivers to make the journey, particularly as lay-bys, view-points, and other conveniences are proposed to be provided.
Ralph Cropper
elaborate forms of public transport has been suggested. The first idea was that the — at that time unnamed — new town should have a monorail system snaking all over it as its basic public transport system. More recently it has been associated with the "Dial-a-bus" system being developed by Ford of America.
After studying the plans for Milton Keynes, and discussing its future transport policy with Mr David Jamieson, deputy chief engineer of the highways and transportation department of the Development Corporation, it is clear to me that neither of these innovations is likely to be introduced. A two-tier public transport system is likely to provide the city's internal public transport, consisting of a network of conventional bus services throughout most of its area, supplemented by some system of minibuses operating in the city centre itself.
The former services will be provided — at least initially — by NBC subsidiary United Counties, while electric vehicles built by Crompton Leyland Electricars Ltd, of Tredegar, are being evaluated for possible city centre use. At present the city centre consists of open country at Bradwell Common, and construction is not expected to begin for some time.
The development of a new town in North Buckinghamshire was first proposed by the county council in 1962 to cater for the potential population explosion in the towns in the south of Buckinghamshire. In 1964 the Minister of Housing and Local Government proposed a new city in this area, and after a public inquiry in 1966, the Minister designated the establishment, under the Town Development Act 1952, of a city to house 250,000 people by the end of the century. He also decided to name the new city Milton Keynes, after a small village of that name inside the designated area. In May 1967 Milton Keynes Development Corporation was formed, and 10 months ago construction began (principally site preparation, though house building has now started).
The designated area takes in the town of Bletchley — already fast developing as a London overspill town — in the south, and extends up A5 to Stony Stratford, the boundary then running eastwards to M1 at Newport Pagnell, taking in Wolverton and New Bradwell, but excluding Newport Pagnell itself. After running south-east down M1 for about two miles, the boundary runs southwards towards Woburn Sands, then south-west to Fenny Stratford and Bletchley.
Good road and rail communications exist. the Euston to Glasgow electric line bisecting the city with existing stations at Bletchley and Wolverton and passing close enough to the proposed city centre to allow the possible building of a new central Station there. There is also a rail link from Bletchley to Bedford, with connections to places such
as Derby, Nottingham and Sheffield. I understand this latter line is up for closure, , however. Surely the construction of the new city can save it?
Grid pattern In contrast to Runcorn, Milton Keynes has, from the outset, been planned to provide a city where the car will be the predominant form of transport, having
access to every part of the city's road system. Public transport exponents might be very disappointed that the planners in the
new city are catering for a peak hour
passenger load on the city's buses of only 20 per cent of all commuters, the rest using private cars. Rut the master plan accepts that given "comfortable, fast and convenient public transport, some people may choose it in preference to using cars".
To accommodate a large volume of cars, a grid pattern of main roads at about one kilometre ('-mile) intervals is planned. This is more intensive than the provision of main roads in conventional cities. Having admitted that a minority of the citizens will not be able to use cars, the master plan goes on to stress that a fast, convenient, and reliable system of bus services will be provided. The free-flowing traffic will guarantee reliability.
With Norman Morton of Newcastle University and former gm at Sunderland as public transport consultant for Milton Keynes, I believe a high level of bus services will be maintained. Buses will operate along all the main roads, and bus stops will be sited half-way along each side of each kilometre square. Maximum walking distance to a bus stop will be a six-minute walk, (500 metres) and the average three to four (250 metres). Flexible routeing patterns will allow the majority of bus passengers to reach their destination without having to change buses.
On November 1 the city's first internal bus service began. It is an express service, running hourly (half-hourly during peaks) between Wolverton and Bletchley, via Stony Stratford and A5. The Bristol MW-type single-deckers employed on the service carry the name "Milton Keynes New City". As soon as delivery can be obtained of some Bristol RESL single-deckers, the city's first stage service will commence (probably January). These buses will also bear the Milton Keynes name, though will be in United Counties standard green and cream
livery.
At some later date, a more separate identification will probably be introduced. Mr Jamieson told me that single-deckers had been chosen because, with wide density housing, their passenger capacity would be adequate.' And if, in the future, some more exotic form of transport is chosen, there will be sufficient space alongside the roads to accommodate it. A far cry from Runcorn!