East-West Rail (EWR): Oxford-Bletchley construction progress

[The Planner]

I think they're very good at knowing what rules they can get away with breaking, and seem to know where all the speed cameras are. I'd hope that they would know they can't get away with jumping the lights at a level crossing, particularly if they put up a camera there to catch people doing it!

Most, if not all, sat navs tell you where the cameras are. Waze for example.

 

[67018]

You would at least stop queues building up either side, and taxi/bus drivers are (hopefully!) less likely to run the risk of going through the barriers

It slightly misses the point, though. The issue is that in future "the minimum barrier down time at the level crossing would likely exceed 32 minutes per hour" (quoting the consultation document). That's not very compatible with any sort of bus timetable. Even as things are, many locals avoid using this route due to the high likelihood of getting delayed.

 

[absolutelymilk]

It slightly misses the point, though. The issue is that in future "the minimum barrier down time at the level crossing would likely exceed 32 minutes per hour" (quoting the consultation document). That's not very compatible with any sort of bus timetable. Even as things are, many locals avoid using this route due to the high likelihood of getting delayed.

True! I guess it depends what the time saving is vs using the alternative route

 

[Sun Chariot]

It slightly misses the point, though. The issue is that in future "the minimum barrier down time at the level crossing would likely exceed 32 minutes per hour" (quoting the consultation document). That's not very compatible with any sort of bus timetable. Even as things are, many locals avoid using this route due to the high likelihood of getting delayed.

Do bus services to & from Launton or Aylesbury actually use London Road (given the limited clearance for longer vehicles, into the town that way)? I lived in Bicester 1991 to 1993 and I recall the buses went via the bypass (A41) to come into the town centre from that direction.

 

[Forty29]

Yes l believe they still do, then once have alighted passenger's turn around on the roundabout outside Sainsbury's and go back out again that way (A41). I'm sure buses to St George's Barracks on the Aylesbury A41 side of Bicester do, or used to. I can't recall seeing a bus recently use the crossing but may be wrong.

 

[Andyjs247]

Although the S5 no longer goes to Arncott (or Launton or Langford) there is now an hourly H5 bus from Bicester to the John Radcliffe Hospital via Graven Hill, Ambrosden, Islip and Headington. There is also a 108 which serves Langford and goes to Headington and Oxford via the villages. Both of these go along London Road to the A41.

If the level crossing were to be closed then journey times and turn round times in Bicester will be impacted and in turn it risks the viability of the bus service altogether.

The H5 is often a double decker - also the quickest way to the JR hospital by public transport from Bicester as it goes direct.

 

[fishwomp]

Although the S5 no longer goes to Arncott (or Launton or Langford) there is now an hourly H5 bus from Bicester to the John Radcliffe Hospital via Graven Hill, Ambrosden, Islip and Headington. There is also a 108 which serves Langford and goes to Headington and Oxford via the villages. Both of these go along London Road to the A41.

Well, they could terminate on the south side of the crossing. Although that's 500 metres from the rest of the bus stops of Bicester and Sheep St, it may be the most useful destination for Arncott area passengers (the station + Bicester Village). Or perhaps have _other_ buses from the other side of Bicester terminate at Bicester Town/Village station - enabling a walk over the footbridge for bus connections and _rail_ connections that the current bus stops don't provide.

If the level crossing were to be closed then journey times and turn round times in Bicester will be impacted and in turn it risks the viability of the bus service altogether.

The H5 is often a double decker - also the quickest way to the JR hospital by public transport from Bicester as it goes direct.

It's actually fairly close run contest from Market Sq to the JR - Chiltern and change to a 700 at Parkway, vs H5. Both are between 55 and 65 mins.

 

[67018]

Well, they could terminate on the south side of the crossing. Although that's 500 metres from the rest of the bus stops of Bicester and Sheep St, it may be the most useful destination for Arncott area passengers (the station + Bicester Village). Or perhaps have _other_ buses from the other side of Bicester terminate at Bicester Town/Village station - enabling a walk over the footbridge for bus connections and _rail_ connections that the current bus stops don't provide.

Ah, the 'cut the town in half' approach adopted to such acclaim in Oxford with the Botley Road fiasco. Seriously, it sometimes seems like someone is running a campaign to toally kill support for rail investment in Oxfordshire!

It's actually fairly close run contest from Market Sq to the JR - Chiltern and change to a 700 at Parkway, vs H5. Both are between 55 and 65 mins.

True if you are able bodied. If you are sick/elderly/disabled - not unusual for many people heading for the JR - the extra walk to Bicester Village station and change at Parkway can be pretty arduous.

 

[Nottingham59]

Ah, the 'cut the town in half' approach adopted to such acclaim in Oxford with the Botley Road fiasco. Seriously, it sometimes seems like someone is running a campaign to toally kill support for rail investment in Oxfordshire!

They've been talking about reviving the Varsity Line for at least thirty years. Why hasn't a solution to the London Road level crossing been incorporated into plans from the start?

 

[edwin_m]

They've been talking about reviving the Varsity Line for at least thirty years. Why hasn't a solution to the London Road level crossing been incorporated into plans from the start?

This part was re-opened by Chiltern as part of their "Evergreen" expansion project. They probably didn't want to deal with an issue with a significant cost and disruption, if it didn't have any immediate benefit for the London-Oxford service that they were aiming to operate.

 

[jfowkes]

They've been talking about reviving the Varsity Line for at least thirty years. Why hasn't a solution to the London Road level crossing been incorporated into plans from the start?

I guess the physical constraints around available land haven't really changed, so it would have just as difficult to make a plan back then as now.

A sensible approach back then may have been for NR to start buying up land and property around the LC in order to make it easier to actually fix the problem...? I have no idea.

 

[12LDA28C]

They've been talking about reviving the Varsity Line for at least thirty years. Why hasn't a solution to the London Road level crossing been incorporated into plans from the start?

Because there is no solution unless you’re happy to spend a vast amount of money building a bridge or tunnel which would take many months and involve demolishing several houses on the town side of the crossing.

 

[fishwomp]

Because there is no solution unless you’re happy to spend a vast amount of money building a bridge or tunnel which would take many months and involve demolishing several houses on the town side of the crossing.

Every farm crossing for a single tractor a day has been replaced by a bridge on this route - Islip, Otmoor, Verney Jct etc. I don't understand why not here. Cost wise, I get that it might be an awkward location, but is it really more costly than three or four farm crossing replacements..

Nonetheless, if it can't be done, I think they overplay how bad having a road closed for 30 minutes or even 45 is per hour. Every traffic-lighted crossroads in the country closes one orientation for at least 30 mins an hour. Or longer if it has pedestrian lights too.

Ah, the 'cut the town in half' approach adopted to such acclaim in Oxford with the Botley Road fiasco. Seriously, it sometimes seems like someone is running a campaign to toally kill support for rail investment in Oxfordshire!

No, I didn't say close the crossing.. just let those who want to get out at the station and not wait max 10 mins have options, and that perhaps the station is a good place for transport interchange..

 

[I'm here now]

London Road is a key access route for east-side residents and businesses alike.
I cannot see how east-destined commercial traffic benefits from being routed along the bypass then down the existing narrow roads such as Church Street and Market Square.

I was a Bicester resident Jan 1991 until Dec 1993 - prior to Sheep Street commerce was ruined from pedestrianisation (I was on the local Chamber Of Commerce objecting to that act of vandalism); and a few years before redevelopment of the old Tesco site (now a Sainsburys and cinema).

OT: but the only act of vandalism was the cars being there in the first place.

 

[absolutelymilk]

Nonetheless, if it can't be done, I think they overplay how bad having a road closed for 30 minutes or even 45 is per hour. Every traffic-lighted crossroads in the country closes one orientation for at least 30 mins an hour. Or longer if it has pedestrian lights too.

I suppose it depends if it's closed for a minute every other minute, or closed for 15 minutes, then open for 15 minutes and so on...

 

[67018]

Because there is no solution unless you’re happy to spend a vast amount of money building a bridge or tunnel which would take many months and involve demolishing several houses on the town side of the crossing.

Precisely this. It's a constrained site adjacent to a listed building and close to a flood plain. Even the pedestrian-only solution that EWR is proposing involves significant construction and won't be cheap.

At one time, it might have been possible to build a more significant realignment of the road to cross the railway north or south of the current site, but now the area has been heavily developed that would mean knocking down a housing estate or Bicester Village (!). Raising the railway is difficult as it dives under the A41 just to the south.

 

[fishwomp]

, but now the area has been heavily developed that would mean knocking down a housing estate or Bicester Village (!).

Or a southern exit to Bicester village bridges the line to join A41, the current access to the Village is flawed and frequently clogged. They might even get someone else to contribute to fixing the problem., but I have no idea if those retail sites are still growing

 

[12LDA28C]

Every farm crossing for a single tractor a day has been replaced by a bridge on this route - Islip, Otmoor, Verney Jct etc. I don't understand why not here. Cost wise, I get that it might be an awkward location, but is it really more costly than three or four farm crossing replacements..

There really is no comparison between building a bridge over a railway in open space from one field to another and building a bridge in an urban setting in a restricted space with housing in the near vicinity that would need to be demolished. Surely that's fairly obvious?

 

[fishwomp]

There really is no comparison between building a bridge over a railway in open space from one field to another and building a bridge in an urban setting in a restricted space with housing in the near vicinity that would need to be demolished. Surely that's fairly obvious?

Not if you know Bicester. South of the line has very little - 120m with only a petrol station or ground level station parking to worry about _if_ you took the current road alignment (4 houses would have obscured views..). North of the line is 4 houses right next to the crossing, so that'd be an issue. Now take a look at the land west of the crossing - it's railway car park and nothing else.. a dogs leg in the road and you'd have it.

 

[AlterEgo]

Not if you know Bicester. South of the line has very little - 120m with only a petrol station or ground level station parking to worry about _if_ you took the current road alignment (4 houses would have obscured views..). North of the line is 4 houses right next to the crossing, so that'd be an issue. Now take a look at the land west of the crossing - it's railway car park and nothing else.. a dogs leg in the road and you'd have it.

The rise for a bridge to clear a railway line - and allow space for future electrification - would start a couple of hundred yards back from the six foot. The north side of the crossing would be problematic for this reason. Bridges are also usually wider than the width of the road.

 

[Nottingham59]

and allow space for future electrification

But that's not needed now

 

[AlterEgo]

But that's not needed now

It will be in the future. Unless your plan is to not futureproof anything. That went really well before!

 

[fishwomp]

The rise for a bridge to clear a railway line - and allow space for future electrification - would start a couple of hundred yards back from the six foot. The north side of the crossing would be problematic for this reason.

Yes, I was measuring existing bridges for length of approach and rise.. nothing wrong with 1 in 10 or even 1 in 6 or 7 in the days of horse and cart.. but the modern motor car, that's a different beast! FWIW, Launton Station is a 260m ramp on the north side, but the farm crossing between Kidlington and Watereaton is about 160m.

Bridges are also usually wider than the width of the road.

Wouldn't work if it were narrower Although a single lane with a traffic light might keep volume of traffic down - Bicester centre can't really take much traffic anyway, and the council is largely preferring cars to go towards the ring road and use other routes to get places, rather than see it as a suboptimal rat run.

 

[12LDA28C]

But that's not needed now

If you can accurately predict the future, I'll have this weekend's lottery numbers please. EWR may well be electrified at some point and as has already been mentioned on this thread, all new bridges have been built with clearance for OHLE and London Road would be no different.

 

[edwin_m]

Although a single lane with a traffic light might keep volume of traffic down - Bicester centre can't really take much traffic anyway, and the council is largely preferring cars to go towards the ring road and use other routes to get places, rather than see it as a suboptimal rat run.

That's also a reason to close the crossing completely.

 

[67018]

Yes, I was measuring existing bridges for length of approach and rise.. nothing wrong with 1 in 10 or even 1 in 6 or 7 in the days of horse and cart.. but the modern motor car, that's a different beast! FWIW, Launton Station is a 260m ramp on the north side, but the farm crossing between Kidlington and Watereaton is about 160m.

From memory, I think previous studies have suggested that the approach ramp for a bridge would have to start fairly close to the Launton Road roundabout so there would be widespread impact on local properties. This is one of the things that makes the cost prohibitive.

Rerouting via Gavray Drive and demolishing Aldi and Wickes would probably be better and cheaper - this is the other option that is mentioned, and dismissed, in the consultation document.

 

[fishwomp]

That's also a reason to close the crossing completely.

Could have a sweepstake for where this all ends up..., I don't know what the vision for that gnarled up bit of Bicester just north of the crossing that it links into is either - so you could see Network Rail building a lovely bridge (YMMV), transporter, teleporter, tunnel etc - and then five years later the council banning vehicles from using the road as a through road, or at all..

 

[stuu]

There appears to be plenty of room, it's nothing like as constrained a site as plenty that get dealt with elsewhere in Europe. The problem is, as so often, that the minimum standards are too high and leave little room for pragmatic solutions, like sharper curves or steeper slopes

 

[ainsworth74]

As the construction phase between Oxford & Bletchley appears to be mostly complete this thread is now going to be locked. If there are any updates regarding the actual construction on this bit of the line then please report this post and the Forum Staff will look at reopening the thread for further comments.

Regarding the ongoing consultation there are two threads for comments. Firstly there is this thread which is for discussion of the consultation and what is actually being proposed. There is a second thread, which can be found here, which is for speculative posts about the consultation (such as "What I think they should do is..." type posts). There is also the test runs thread which can be found here.

Please use one of the above posts for further comments about the ongoing developments for East West Rail.

Thanks!