OxRail 2040 - plan from Oxfordshire County Council

[67018]

Oxfordshire County Council have published a consultation on what they've called "OxRAIL 2040: Plan for Rail" which can be found here: https://letstalk.oxfordshire.gov.uk...523454&goal=0_206c6fb447-6187f9f7e2-408523454

Introduction
This summary report of our OxRAIL 2040: Plan for Rail (the Plan), sets out
Oxfordshire County Council’s bold ambitions for the future of rail in the
Oxfordshire. The Plan is being developed to support the over-arching
aims and ambitions of our adopted Local Transport and Connectivity
Plan. The Plan describes a vision of rail in Oxfordshire being a central
part of an integrated, accessible and sustainable transport system that
enables all parts of the county to thrive. It also recognises the imminent
and on-going changes in the structures of both local government and the
rail industry and the opportunities and challenges this may create.

The improved connectivity the Plan would deliver will help improve
quality of life, support new housing and jobs, and drive nationally
significant economic growth and productivity.

It focuses on three key themes:
• Improving connectivity and enhancing infrastructure – defining
the services, infrastructure and operational changes required.
• Climate action – setting out how rail can achieve net zero and
adapt to a changing climate.
• Rail as placeshaper – highlighting the role of stations and rail in
shaping inclusive, connected communities...

There's quite a lot in there, and I assume this is a wish list for the next 15 years that they will then need to find funding for. Some of this will come from some sizeable housing developments in the area. Some highlights including:

• Cowley branch line plus new stations at Wantage & Grove, Begbroke and Ardley. Ardley isn't one I've seen before and is slated for post-2038 'if possible', linked to the plan for 9000 new houses on the old Heyford airfield site.
• Increased frequency on a 'Science line' Didcot - Oxford - Banbury with 4-tracking Radley-Oxford.
• North Cotswold line upgrades, reinstating a second track between Hanborough and Wolvercote.
• Development of the Electric Freight Spine and electrification from Didcot to Bletchley

With much else also included. What do people think - realistic vision or pie in the sky?

Consultation launched on Wednesday and closes on 1st October.

 

[Class 170101]

Not sure I saw any mention about Bristol to Oxford.

Arguably it would give EWR somewhere to go at Oxford for 2tph. The other two perhaps to Cowley if Chiltern don't vacate Platform 1 and go there instead.

 

[Benjwri]

What a great use of my council tax. Who are they expecting to pay for this? Presumably the government, which I think we all know isn't happening anytime soon. 6tph for Radley and Culham is a similar service level to some inner London stations with far greater populations, I don't see how they're planning on managing it, the line thickness (Which while looking like it is isn't actually proportional to service levels) suggests these trains continue towards London.

It is nice to see ambition, but a ridiculous amount of money will have been spent on this report, just to basically list a bunch of ambitions with very little realistic chance of ever being funded.

 

[67018]

Not sure I saw any mention about Bristol to Oxford.

Arguably it would give EWR somewhere to go at Oxford for 2tph. The other two perhaps to Cowley if Chiltern don't vacate Platform 1 and go there instead.

Bristol to Oxford is mentioned on page 17 as a phase 1 delivery i.e. by 2030: "In Phase 1, the priority is delivering EWR on time and securing a permanent hourly Oxford–Bristol service to link science and technology clusters and cut road congestion."

What a great use of my council tax. Who are they expecting to pay for this? Presumably the government, which I think we all know isn't happening anytime soon. 6tph for Radley and Culham is a similar service level to some inner London stations with far greater populations, I don't see how they're planning on managing it, the line thickness (Which while looking like it is isn't actually proportional to service levels) suggests these trains continue towards London.

It is nice to see ambition, but a ridiculous amount of money will have been spent on this report, just to basically list a bunch of ambitions with very little realistic chance of ever being funded.

I'd much rather they spent some money and effort into properly planning the necessary infrastructure rather than just making it up as we go along, which seems to be the usual approach. Do we really want to be sitting here in 2040 wondering why we are trying to run a world-class science and technology hub with an hourly 2-car DMU service?

If I read the tone of the report right, the aspiration is for this 'science corridor' to be a pretty sizeable conurbation running north from Didcot across a large chunk of Oxfordshire and, alongside the scale of housing development proposed, will be serving a much larger population than today. Maybe that's not a desirable or realistic aspiration, but in that case now is the time to say so in reply to the consultation.

To me, a lot of this depends on how well it links into the government's strategy for the Oxford-Cambridge arc - it looks like it's strongly aligned and if there's serious intent at a national level to get this moving then the funding is much more likely to follow.

 

[Stewart2887]

Cowley and Wantage seem fairly straightforward. Williams F1 might have some objections to the latter. Swindon-Wantage-Oxford with some more distant/intermediate stops looks a good plan

 

[Benjwri]

I'd much rather they spent some money and effort into properly planning the necessary infrastructure rather than just making it up as we go along, which seems to be the usual approach. Do we really want to be sitting here in 2040 wondering why we are trying to run a world-class science and technology hub with an hourly 2-car DMU service?

If I read the tone of the report right, the aspiration is for this 'science corridor' to be a pretty sizeable conurbation running north from Didcot across a large chunk of Oxfordshire and, alongside the scale of housing development proposed, will be serving a much larger population than today. Maybe that's not a desirable or realistic aspiration, but in that case now is the time to say so in reply to the consultation.

To me, a lot of this depends on how well it links into the government's strategy for the Oxford-Cambridge arc - it looks like it's strongly aligned and if there's serious intent at a national level to get this moving then the funding is much more likely to follow.

Dreaming is nice but it is plainly and painfully obvious nothing of this scale it going to happen, least by 2040. This type of report isn’t exactly new, countless councils have done it and run consultations like this. It’s very rare they go anywhere. The report gives very base level aspirations, with no real thought into how they will be achieved. The needs for upgrades could be easily identified without it.

There are far greater transport concerns the council should be worried about, and the pressing issue of the two car DMUs could be solved with far smaller interventions.

The potential future need for services is all based on aspirational development with no commitment itself, and even if that does go ahead (Personally I think the scale of that map is very unlikely given the planning climate currently) the service levels at places like radley are hardly justified.

 

[Magdalia]

Oxfordshire County Council have published a consultation on what they've called "OxRAIL 2040: Plan for Rail"

Thanks for finding and sharing this.

As regular readers might expect I mainly look at what is happening in the other place as a compare and contrast exercise with what is happening here at the other end of the corridor.

realistic vision or pie in the sky?

From the land of the dreaming spires I was expecting something at the pie in the sky end of the spectrum.

But what I found was far nearer to being a realistic vision than most of what we get served up with here. I hope that people in Cambridge will read the report, they could learn a thing or two.

Things I particularly liked were:

This enhanced core service would establish what we call the “Science Line”, linking Oxfordshire’s leading centres of research, innovation and advanced manufacturing. By connecting existing and new stations including Didcot Parkway, Culham [the new Cowley and Littlemore stations] Oxford, Begbroke and Banbury, it would allow seamless travel between towns and major innovation hubs across the county.

This is just the sort of thing that needs to happen Ely-Waterbeach-Cambridge North-Cambridge-Cambridge South-Whittlesford or Granta Park. Cambridge is far ahead on infrastructure but far behind on thinking about how to make best use of it.

In Phase 1 (2025–2030), Oxfordshire County Council will work with Government, Network Rail and train operators as the industry procures new battery and bi-mode trains

This is far more realistic than expecting large scale electrification any time soon. We could do with similar realism here, especially regarding Stansted-Norwich/Peterborough.

Single ticketing platform – use of multi-mode tickets and tap-and-go technology across bus and rail, with simple, capped fares and flexible tickets that reflect changing travel patterns.

The Oxfordshire Metro concept does not require re-regulation of buses.

Meaningful progress will begin in Phase 1 (2025–2030), with early priorities such as integrated ticketing. Delivery will accelerate as new transport powers and funding are secured, and as rail reform provides Oxfordshire with a stronger voice in shaping the railway. The Oxfordshire Metro concept will form the core of a new model of joint investment and local accountability in transport.

This is the right prioritisation. Here in Cambridge almost nobody talks about multi-mode ticketing and we are disappearing down the bus franchising rabbit hole.

For many communities in Oxfordshire, particularly rural areas, access to rail is still limited. The OxRail 2040 Plan proposes four new stations – Oxford Littlemore, Oxford Cowley, Begbroke and Wantage & Grove – while also exploring the feasibility of a fifth at Ardley. These stations will reduce car dependency, link fast-growing towns and employment hubs to the network, and support sustainable growth.

Cambridge needs more new stations too. Building new stations isn't cheap, but it is cheaper than opening new lines. The Cowley Branch is probably where this gets away from reality and towards pie in the sky, but at least there is no proposal to turn it into a busway!

securing a permanent hourly Oxford–Bristol service to link science and technology clusters and cut road congestion

Cambridge doesn't have an equivalent of this, but from far away Oxford-Swindon-Bath-Bristol looks a no brainer.

West Oxfordshire’s growth requires better rail capacity. A half-hourly service between Moreton-in-Marsh and Didcot Parkway, alongside London services, would provide reliable connections. Reinstating a second track between Hanborough and Wolvercote, plus a new West Oxfordshire Mobility Hub at Hanborough, would enable this.

This is similar to the need to redouble Coldham Lane-Newmarket here.

This type of report isn’t exactly new, countless councils have done it and run consultations like this. It’s very rare they go anywhere.

You're right that reports like this are what councils do, and it is rare that they go anywhere. But the Oxford-Cambridge Corridor, significant employment and housing growth, GBR and local government reorganisation all come together to create an opportunity. Reading this report makes me think that the other place might be doing better than here at developing realistic expectations about how to grasp that opportunity.

 

[67018]

The potential future need for services is all based on aspirational development with no commitment itself, and even if that does go ahead (Personally I think the scale of that map is very unlikely given the planning climate currently) the service levels at places like radley are hardly justified.

You've hit on a key point that a lot of this depends on the assumed level of development, and there will be many that view it as infeasible and/or undesirable. It'll be interesting to see how this debate goes given that the development will both drive the demand and provide a chunk of the funding.

On the other hand, some of these are far more than aspirational - the planning application has just gone in for 9000 houses at Heyford; there's a huge development already approved at Yarnton; North Oxford golf club has been sold for development; and there's a load of building already happening at Wolvercote, Bicester and up towards Oxford Parkway.

I do like the acceptance that things will have to be phased and there doesn't look like there's much in the 'phase 1' to 2030 that's impossible, with some of it already happening. There's some sensible realism about the West Oxfordshire corridor in that more work needs to be done to determine whether rail is the best solution.

The planning climate seems to be pretty positive at the moment given the government's explicit policy of removing barriers to development and this area being identified as a focus for growth. And I'd much rather they were promoting this than the more traditional approach, which would probably be to bung a couple more lanes onto the A34.

 

[btdrawer]

Yeah, some of the proposals here (6tph at Radley, 4tph at Islip, 8tph(!) at Bicester) are big-city frequencies. They might make sense if the plan is to allow for massive increases in housing and lab space, perhaps so much as to double the population. I would love to see that - there's clearly loads of pent-up demand for living and working in Oxfordshire - but have to say I'm skeptical it will happen.

 

[Magdalia]

You've hit on a key point that a lot of this depends on the assumed level of development, and there will be many that view it as infeasible and/or undesirable.

They might make sense if the plan is to allow for massive increases in housing and lab space, perhaps so much as to double the population.

If employment and housing in the Oxford and Cambridge areas don't grow rapidly, then the UK economy is in very deep trouble!

Between the 2011 and 2021 censuses most local authority populations in the Oxford area grew by 9-15% (the exception was Oxford City). It only needs these growth rates to continue 2021-2031 and 2031-2041 for populations to have increased by about half between 2011 and 2041. If government reforms do speed up planning and building, then population growth 2031-2041 will be faster than that.

The key points are where the new employment is going to be and where the new houses are going to be. What is Oxford's equivalent of Cambridge's Biomedical Campus and what is Oxford's equivalent of Tempsford New Town?

some of the proposals here (6tph at Radley, 4tph at Islip, 8tph(!) at Bicester) are big-city frequencies.

Employment hubs with tens of thousands of workers need these levels of service from/to the places where those workers are going to be living.

If recent experience in Cambridge is anything to go by, the employment hubs come before the housing. From what I see our construction industry is actually already very good at putting up commercial buildings quickly.

This set me thinking about Railpen, who have 5 major projects in Cambridge. So I looked up what they are doing in Oxford. So far they only have one project there which is called Eastpoint and it is near the proposed Littlemore station on the Cowley Branch. If I were in Oxford then I would be on the lookout for new Railpen investments in the Oxford area.

 

[JamesT]

If employment and housing in the Oxford and Cambridge areas don't grow rapidly, then the UK economy is in very deep trouble!

Between the 2011 and 2021 censuses most local authority populations in the Oxford area grew by 9-15% (the exception was Oxford City). It only needs these growth rates to continue 2021-2031 and 2031-2041 for populations to have increased by about half between 2011 and 2041. If government reforms do speed up planning and building, then population growth 2031-2041 will be faster than that.

The key points are where the new employment is going to be and where the new houses are going to be. What is Oxford's equivalent of Cambridge's Biomedical Campus and what is Oxford's equivalent of Tempsford New Town?


Employment hubs with tens of thousands of workers need these levels of service from/to the places where those workers are going to be living.

If recent experience in Cambridge is anything to go by, the employment hubs come before the housing. From what I see our construction industry is actually already very good at putting up commercial buildings quickly.

This set me thinking about Railpen, who have 5 major projects in Cambridge. So I looked up what they are doing in Oxford. So far they only have one project there which is called Eastpoint and it is near the proposed Littlemore station on the Cowley Branch. If I were in Oxford then I would be on the lookout for new Railpen investments in the Oxford area.

There are several science parks growing around Oxford. The one in Littlemore, one called Oxford North which would have Parkway as its nearest station, and Begbroke.
Though the problem with Oxford isn’t particularly employment sites, it’s housing. The green belt and the flood plain mean pretty much everything within the city limits is built on. Half of Oxford’s workers commute in. Bicester and Didcot have both grown rapidly and have rail links, but other towns and villages around such as Witney, Eynsham, Yarnton, Wheatley have also been growing but rely on the road network.

 

[Topological]

It is certainly easier to lead on the provision on infrastructure, like rail, versus leading on the approval of more housing. The only problem with leading on rail is that the cost-benefit of necessary changes looks poor when the housing does not already exist.

Building around the rail corridors, and enhancing the rail corridors makes complete sense.

Of course, whether this is what Oxfordshire is doing, given the large developments growing in non-rail-connected areas (as mentioned by @JamesT) is an open question. Development along the Swindon - Oxford Road always confuses me when driving along there.

Hopefully, this is the start of a more sensible vision in planning.

 

[Brubulus]

There are several science parks growing around Oxford. The one in Littlemore, one called Oxford North which would have Parkway as its nearest station, and Begbroke.
Though the problem with Oxford isn’t particularly employment sites, it’s housing. The green belt and the flood plain mean pretty much everything within the city limits is built on. Half of Oxford’s workers commute in. Bicester and Didcot have both grown rapidly and have rail links, but other towns and villages around such as Witney, Eynsham, Yarnton, Wheatley have also been growing but rely on the road network.

Densification of the city would be helpful but obviously difficult. The big opportunity in my opinion is a massive new development on the site of North Oxford golf club and around Oxford Parkway car park (which could be made multi-storey and be the station+development car park.) The green belt can be redesignated to enable high-density expansions around railway stations - which would be in line with national policy.

Culham is also a really strong site for a new town, especially given the campus there could be further enhanced as an employment hub.

Milton Park is already a major employment hub alongside the railway, but with limited housing and no station. If a local service were to be introduced, it should have a station and a few thousand homes.

 

[ian1944]

Pity Adlestrop is just into Glos, otherwise it could join in the junket and reopen.

 

[The Planner]

Pity Adlestrop is just into Glos, otherwise it could join in the junket and reopen.

Why? Its in the middle of nowhere and hardly far from Moreton or Kingham.

 

[irish_rail]

No mention of reopening the branch to Witney? I'd of thought that'd be one of the most useful things that could occur in that county, though I suspect the price tag would be high.

 

[Magdalia]

Pity Adlestrop is just into Glos, otherwise it could join in the junket and reopen.

Why? Its in the middle of nowhere and hardly far from Moreton or Kingham.

Poetic licence.

 

[bspahh]

This is the right prioritisation. Here in Cambridge almost nobody talks about multi-mode ticketing and we are disappearing down the bus franchising rabbit hole.

Multimode ticketing would be particularly important for Oxford if buses are needed to connect the stations. For example, between Radley and Abingdon, or Didcot Parkway and Milton Park science park.

 

[Falcon1200]

Pity Adlestrop is just into Glos, otherwise it could join in the junket and reopen.

Why? Its in the middle of nowhere and hardly far from Moreton or Kingham.

So that the express train could draw up unwontedly......

(I'm not really a poetry fan but I find Edward Thomas's Adlestrop beautiful, and moving)

 

[Magdalia]

So that the express train could draw up unwontedly......

(I'm not really a poetry fan but I find Edward Thomas's Adlestrop beautiful, and moving)

And the poem does conclude with a reference to all the birds of Oxfordshire and Gloucestershire.

 

[IC2000]

No mention of reopening the branch to Witney? I'd of thought that'd be one of the most useful things that could occur in that county, though I suspect the price tag would be high.

I doubt there's any real point to considering it properly until the Eynsham P&R is finally operating.

 

[Kingham West]

I doubt there's any real point to considering it properly until the Eynsham P&R is finally operating.

Witney and Carterton , the big omission in what is a very good plan.
West Oxfordshire is being held back by poor road links, large amounts of house building without infrastructure, and a feeling it’s being left behind.
The studies into reopening have shown , good CBR figures of about 3.
It also had a support level of 95% in public opinion, and huge political support .
I am sure the £51m for the Eynsham Parkway works, will boost the BCR yet further. I am not sure they will ever be used for bus services .

 

[Magdalia]

Witney and Carterton , the big omission in what is a very good plan.

The document says this for phase 1:

Connecting West Oxfordshire: A Mass Rapid Transit Corridor Development on the A40 Corridor in West Oxfordshire, particularly around Eynsham, Witney and Carterton continues to put significant pressure on travel by road. Without the development of alternative transport options, increasing congestion will continue to impact on the economy, environment and quality of life. We have previously commissioned technical examinations of the feasibility of a new railway linking the North Cotswold Line with Carterton. We will continue to develop options for longer term mass rapid transit (which may include rail) for this corridor and will identify deliverable plans and financing mechanisms for its implementation. We will do this whilst working with the rail industry to maximise the utility of the existing railway together with developing mobility hubs to provide sustainable travel options for West Oxfordshire.

 

[Kingham West]

The document says this for phase 1:

Noted , I had read that, I think I would have preferred it shown on maps, longer term vision.. The business case is strong and Oxford Remodelling, helps yet further .

 

[ian1944]

Why? Its in the middle of nowhere and hardly far from Moreton or Kingham.

Pure nostalgia.

For any pedants out there, the train that Edward Thomas is thought to have been on, Paddington to Kidderminster or Wolverhampton (it's not possible to say which from the format of the timetable) en route to Ledbury via a change at Shrub Hill, did have a scheduled stop at Adlestrop that day. "As timetabled. It was late June" doesn't have the same ring to it, of course.

 

[Mitchell Hurd]

Yeah, some of the proposals here (6tph at Radley, 4tph at Islip, 8tph(!) at Bicester) are big-city frequencies. They might make sense if the plan is to allow for massive increases in housing and lab space, perhaps so much as to double the population. I would love to see that - there's clearly loads of pent-up demand for living and working in Oxfordshire - but have to say I'm skeptical it will happen.

There's a good bus service to and from Abingdon and Radley as well. Plus Kennington residents yes will have to go down to Radley then go back north but better than getting stuck in traffic, changing buses in Oxford and lugging suitcases to platform 4 or the new 5 when it's opened. With Radley it's much more simple. Ideally one of the Oxford - Reading - London IET's could call there, reducing the need for passengers to go to Oxford or Didcot!

 

[Parebunks]

Yeah, some of the proposals here (6tph at Radley, 4tph at Islip, 8tph(!) at Bicester) are big-city frequencies. They might make sense if the plan is to allow for massive increases in housing and lab space, perhaps so much as to double the population. I would love to see that - there's clearly loads of pent-up demand for living and working in Oxfordshire - but have to say I'm skeptical it will happen.

8tph at Bicester seems very plausible - 2tph Milton Keynes, 2tph Bedford, 2/3tph London leaves only one or two more to find. Islip, Radley, Culham etc do seem a lot more doubtful, and hard to see why it would be worth slowing so many trains down that much. Seems a bit of a disconnect between that and 1tph at Wantage & Grove, which feels needlessly unambitious for a new station - at minimum there should be 1tph towards Oxford and 1tph towards Didcot and Reading to fully deliver on the investment.

 

[67018]

8tph at Bicester seems very plausible - 2tph Milton Keynes, 2tph Bedford, 2/3tph London leaves only one or two more to find. Islip, Radley, Culham etc do seem a lot more doubtful, and hard to see why it would be worth slowing so many trains down that much. Seems a bit of a disconnect between that and 1tph at Wantage & Grove, which feels needlessly unambitious for a new station - at minimum there should be 1tph towards Oxford and 1tph towards Didcot and Reading to fully deliver on the investment.

Seems quite reasonable to me to be looking at that frequency for Bicester - the population is pushing 40,000 now and projected to pass 50,000 by 2031 and you still have to fit in all those Bicester Village visitors. Radley presumably depends on is sort of becoming Abingdon Parkway, and Culham on expanding and devloping round the science centre. Islip seems to have limited development potential, though, given the extent of flood plains - you wouldn't build a station there if one didn't already exist.

 

[PTR 444]

8tph at Bicester seems very plausible - 2tph Milton Keynes, 2tph Bedford, 2/3tph London leaves only one or two more to find. Islip, Radley, Culham etc do seem a lot more doubtful, and hard to see why it would be worth slowing so many trains down that much. Seems a bit of a disconnect between that and 1tph at Wantage & Grove, which feels needlessly unambitious for a new station - at minimum there should be 1tph towards Oxford and 1tph towards Didcot and Reading to fully deliver on the investment.

How much of a time penalty would there be if a Wantage & Grove stop was slotted into one of the existing London IET services?

 

[The Planner]

How much of a time penalty would there be if a Wantage & Grove stop was slotted into one of the existing London IET services?

4½-5 mins