OxRail 2040 - plan from Oxfordshire County Council

[Zomboid]

I think Abingdon is largely a dormitory for Oxford, no matter what other settlement might be analogous - and rail probably isn't the answer for travel between the two. Perhaps if there were a station at Kensington/ Redbridge served by a local metro service to Cowley/ Begbrooke there would be enough destinations to drive some demand, but Oxford station itself isn't especially useful for short distance visits.

I think I saw somewhere that they're looking at a bus lane for the A34 to alleviate the unreliable journey times on the buses (hopefully an additional lane rather than squeezing everything else into one lane, because that would be a disaster).

 

[overthere 2]

A reversing train service is almost as annoying as a bus service that loops round.

My idea is really about giving people local connections Wantage - Didcot, Witney - Oxford, Cowley - Wallingford etc So while people would be welcome to use it for more long distance Wantage - Eynsham etc they would just have to like it or lump it for the reversing.

Then bite the bullet and buy land.

Have a new line south of Didcot, on a grade separated junction, that heads up to Harwell, weaves somehow through/around Grove/Wantage, snakes up to Faringdon, up to Carterton, Witney Parkway, Eynsham Parkway, and down to Yarnton before heading into Oxford on existing lines.

When I came up with my idea I did think of saying about putting a triangle junction at the king Alfred roundabout and building a branch to Harwell but I feel it is more urgent to re-open old lines that could potentially be lost forever - like central Witney for example - or new lines where there is really only one place you can place a track Grove - Wantage however what I would do is identify where a possible line could go in the future and leave a corridor clear and to stop any future Nimby'ism the developers would have to tell the house buyers that one day you could have a railway next door and it is also in black and white in the house deeds so if the house is sold on in the meantime then the new owner's cant say we did'nt know.

Also if you let a developer build in one field they then want the field next door to that and the next one to that and so on and so on. So the reason I suggested about building at Eynsham is you have already houses built in the north and the railway in the south acting as barriers to urban sprawl. The problem of building a line like you suggest is most of it would go through unspoilt countryside and would cost hundreds of millions so while you could get developers to stump up a sizeable amount of cash to help pay for it they are going to want to build thousands of houses to get their money back.

Really instead of asking "where do we put all these houses to cater for an exploding population?" we should really be asking "why is the population exploding?" but that is a too awkward and enbarrassing question for any political party except Reform.

Waitrose is already built. Cash is only stumped up at the point of development, and in this case not even a few percent of what you need.

It seems to me that when it comes to railway projects it is not one entity (government usually) providing all the money out of one pot, instead it's lots of entity's (government, councils, local enterprise, regional development funds etc) providing money out of lots of different pots.

So lets say for arguments sake it costs £50 million to re-open the Abingdon branch, you get the various entity's to put in a share until you have a total of £45 million you then go to Waitrose and say "To get this railway built you need to put in £5 million" Waitrose, then have a simple choice they either "loan" the £5 million because they will get it back through the tills and after they do it is pure profit, look good to the people of Abingdon as they have helped bring back the railway and Waitrose are very keen on "green issues" so it looks good from a corporate point of view.

Or

They say "No", keep their £5 million but lose their future extra profits, look bad to the residents because they stopped them getting there railway back which might mean some boycott them and look like hypocrites about being green.

And I reckon they would most likely choose the former

If connections to the mainline network are unfeasible due to money, capacity or a number of other things then a lot of the medium sized towns orbiting Oxford seem like a good candidate for a tram-train/stadtbahn style solution - especially considering Oxford station is capacity constrained and located away from the tourist areas of the city. Tram-trains/stadtbahns can run on the main roads through the touristy centre then on regular railways / light rail lines to Abingdon, Witney, Kidlington etc.
It provides the 'rail' effect (i.e. a number of people see themselves above taking a bus but are fine taking a train/tram - hence why London/Kent's 'trackless tram' electric buses have been successful) which allows for modal shift while also not clogging up 2-track mainlines with frequent local trains.

I'm not familiar with the stadbahn but I would say look at the second part of post #142 in this thread https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...n-and-aberystwyth-to-carmarthen-lines.247404/ to see why for re-opening or building a new line the only option should be heavy rail.

In 1997-99, I lived in the North of Abingdon and worked at the Oxford Science Park, near the football ground.

To get to work, I would sometimes drive and sometimes cycle. It was free to park at work, and the congestion was fine. I would take the bus if I wanted to go into the centre of Oxford, as parking was expensive and the traffic was awful. However, the buses would stop a lot, there were lots of speed bumps, and the buses would shake and rattle.

Google Maps says to do that commute tomorrow, to arrive at 9am would take 16 minutes by car, 27 minutes by bicycle and 54 minutes by bus. The 35 bus has 19 stops and takes 21 minutes to get to the Redbridge Park and Ride. Then theres a 15 minute wait for another bus to the Science Park.

If there was a station built in the Abindgon Waitrose car park, the door to door time would be about the same. Abingdon to Oxford would be quicker, but I'd have a 20 minute walk to the station, or 13 minutes with a walk and bus. A train ride would be smoother, but the frequency would be worse.

If I was still doing that commute, to discourage me from using my car, you could charge for the parking.

To get me to use a bus, a smoother ride without speed bumps, fewer stops and a more frequent service would help.

Even with the time to get my bicycle ready, cycle, lock it at work and have a shower, it would as fast as a journey by bus or train using 2-3 services.

It sounds like you are talking in the past tense but I have two questions for you:

Question 1 - If both the Abingdon and Cowley branches were open today and you were doing the same commute which form of transport would you most likely use:

A - Bike

B - Bus

C - Car

D - Train



Question 2 - If you were going in to Oxford itself which form of transport would you most likely use:

A - Bike

B - Bus

C - Train

Without wishing to rain on everyone's parade, did I miss something somewhere? Abingdon is not mentioned in the consultation document and the sort of things being discussed here strike me as far less likely and practicable than things that are actually being proposed. So it would look like, unless the promoters of this strategy do a big about turn, this is not on the cards any time before 2041.

It is indeed a wish list document; however my point was that the wishes it lists are at least reasonably well considered and not completely infeasible over the 15 years it covers. Unlike some of the suggestions here which seem wildly pie in the sky.

And the Rail Promoters group has been set up by Oxfordshire County Council, Oxford City Council and the Department for Transport - if they don't have the money, I don't know who does. If the government is serious about its growth plans, some of it will have to happen. (I readily accept that it's quite possible that the government may fail to deliver on its plans...)

I know this could just turn out to be a wish list fantasy land and this could be the first and last we ever hear about it but as 67018 says in post #4 says "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? also it is refreshing to hear a plan that puts rail first and foremost rather than the usual plan "which is more buses to add to the congestion that is already there caused by the motorists who DONT want to use the bus or improve the roads which simply encourages more traffic" a thing I hear with depressing regularity on here on what is supposed to be a rail supporters/enthusiast forum.

Also this is not saying: 2We have done the studies, found the cash, got the materials and got the builders on stand by so you just need to tell us yes or no to go ahead2. It is a consultation on what you think of the ideas they have come up with but also it asks in question 23 of the survey:


Please use the box below to tell us any other thoughts or suggestions that you have about the future of rail in Oxfordshire, and how it can support communities, the environment and the economy:


And this thread may well have raised ideas and thoughts that the survey people might not have thought off for example using the Cholsey and Wallingford railway for morning and evening commuter services, re-opening the Abingdon branch or building a branch to Wantage.


Therefore I would suggest to everybody they fill in the survey with there own thoughts and ideas and see what happen's. You have to be quick though as the survey closes at 23.59 on Wednesday the 1st of October.

 

[Farigiraf]

I'm not familiar with the stadbahn but I would say look at the second part of post #142 in this thread https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...n-and-aberystwyth-to-carmarthen-lines.247404/ to see why for re-opening or building a new line the only option should be heavy rail.

Bangor to Afon Wen/Porthmadog would be a rural railway through mostly sparsely populated areas. The only settlement of notable size along the route is Caernarfon, so heavy rail is obviously the answer for that.
New light railways to Abingdon, Witney etc. from Oxford would be more than half the distance as Bangor to Afon Wen, and Oxford is the main destination from these towns rather than in Gwynedd where Bangor is not the only place where Caernarfon/Pwllheli/Porthmadog travellers would want to go. From Abingdon, for example, to reach destinations other than Oxford, travelling into Oxford station and from there catching a London train would be slower than driving/cycling/taking a bus to Radley or Culham station anyway.
Additionally Oxford station is not located well for the city centre, so running a stadtbahn through the city centre would draw far more custom than a mainline railway.

I don't really see how you can draw parallels between this and the proposals in North Wales.

 

[bspahh]

It sounds like you are talking in the past tense but I have two questions for you:

Question 1 - If both the Abingdon and Cowley branches were open today and you were doing the same commute which form of transport would you most likely use:

A - Bike
B - Bus
C - Car
D - Train

If it was for me when I was in my 30s, with a new mortgage and baby, I'd go for by bike as it would be the cheapest, reasonably quick and enjoyable, or by car as it was fastest with cheap incremental costs. The bus would be slow, noisy and bumpy. The train would be slow and expensive.
If it was for me today, I'd probably be working from home most of the time. If I did do the commute, the bike and train would be more attractive.

Question 2 - If you were going in to Oxford itself which form of transport would you most likely use:

A - Bike
B - Bus
C - Train

For this, I'd probably go by train to avoid noisy, rattly buses going over speed bumps and stopping everywhere. A train would also be preferable to a bus with a pram.

When I lived in Abingdon, I didn't go into the centre of Oxford very often, and I don't remember cycling there from Abingdon. I would be more likely to cycle if I needed to get to different places within Oxford. I'd drive if I was going to somewhere in Oxford with free/cheap parking, like Wickes, or to the hospital.

 

[fishwomp]

Additionally Oxford station is not located well for the city centre, so running a stadtbahn through the city centre would draw far more custom than a mainline railway.

It needs something distinctive. I asked Google to draw Oxford with the Schwebebahn but it didn't do too well at the railway aspect of that.. Can't see any issues for Oxford with this heading down the High and Cowley Road

 

[Farigiraf]

It needs something distinctive. I asked Google to draw Oxford with the Schwebebahn but it didn't do too well at the railway aspect of that.. Can't see any issues for Oxford with this heading down the High and Cowley Road

View attachment 189499

One of the issues of surface level railways is that, if built on the cheap, they can be quite an eyesore - especially in Oxford with its historic streets.
The solution to that is underground trains (Oxford S-Bahn/Crossrail, anyone?) but even by European standards, Oxford is on the smaller side to warrant an underground.

A cheaper alternative is to only run trams/tram-trains along the wider, main roads, with pedestrianised streets connecting the tourist sites with the tram stops. A problem with this is that there aren't many wide north-south roads along the city, at most there would be space for an east-west alignment via Broad Street or High Street, with trams running in different directions along the less wide streets, as is done around Hyson Green in Nottingham.
The benefit of this option is that Cambridge would then opt for the opposite option and it may get an underground network

 

[Magdalia]

The solution to that is underground trains (Oxford S-Bahn/Crossrail, anyone?) but even by European standards, Oxford is on the smaller side to warrant an underground.

The benefit of this option is that Cambridge would then opt for the opposite option and it may get an underground network

One of the biggest merits of the Oxford strategy document is that it hasn't gone for any fantasy nonsense about light rail underground systems. Anyone who took a proper look at the Crossrail construction sites will know that anything similar is not going to happen in either Oxford or Cambridge.

 

[Zomboid]

There have been proposals for a light rail system in Oxford, from what I can recall essentially connecting the station with the hospitals and Headington.

Full light rail is probably a bit ambitious, but I would expect proponents of it to be watching the Coventry VLR thing closely. Oxford would seem to be a good prospect for something like that if it's successful.

 

[Farigiraf]

One of the biggest merits of the Oxford strategy document is that it hasn't gone for any fantasy nonsense about light rail underground systems. Anyone who took a proper look at the Crossrail construction sites will know that anything similar is not going to happen in either Oxford or Cambridge.

Clearly it has no chance of happening in the current economic/political situation (though this can change too) but neither is it 'fantasy nonsense'. Eventually the time for a mass transit project will come for every ~100k+ city in the UK, though it will take time.
While OxRail 2040 is understandably not committing to such projects (even new stations and frequency increases are probably overambitious) there's no harm in discussing in a speculative thread the options for connecting Abingdon etc. - if it's going too off-topic from the 2040 plan then it can be split into a separate thread.
New rail lines in Oxfordshire through heavy or light rail are currently both about equally likely to happen (near 0%) but dismissing it completely as never happening will indeed result in nothing ever happening. On the other hand if people discuss and debate such projects, keeping aspirations alive, then maybe something official will eventually come of it. Crossrail or HS2 or even the Tyne and Wear metro was 'fantasy nonsense' at one point too.

 

[Magdalia]

Clearly it has no chance of happening in the current economic/political situation (though this can change too)

You are right that the economic and political situation could change, but in Oxford and Cambridge that's not the deal breaker for tunnels.

The deal breaker is that Oxford and Cambridge both have rivers lined with medieval buildings, and city centres that don't have the locations that can tolerate the demolition and disruption required to build underground stations. Look, for example, at the construction sites for the Elizabeth Line stations at Farringdon and Tottenham Court Road. The old Cambridge city centre doesn't have any sites that could cope with the demolition and disruption required, and I doubt that Oxford has either.

Furthermore, Crossrail didn't have to go under the Thames, and the Tyne and Wear Metro had a derelict waterfront way below the city, not medieval chapels, cloisters and wine cellars near to the river.

dismissing it completely as never happening will indeed result in nothing ever happening.

There are plenty of practical and achievable options, as the Oxford 2040 document demonstrates.

 

[Zomboid]

Oxford city centre isn't big enough for there to be any need to move people around within the city by heavy rail metro. So an underground station in the centre would probably be a diversion of the main line, and that really is fantasy land stuff - though you could probably put an entrance near the bus station and another near the Westgate shopping centre without knocking anything important down.

 

[Farigiraf]

There are plenty of practical and achievable options, as the Oxford 2040 document demonstrates.

They are short to medium term options that would majorly improve places along the existing network (plus Cowley) but still don't provide a good solution to the towns which are not located along a railway line. In that aspect it would've been better for it to have been a document about all public transport mode improvements by 2040, as this could then include things like integrated express buses from the towns disconnected to the railway, timed to connect with Oxford/Reading/London trains at interchange stations. This is achievable by 2040 and would massively improve connectivity.

You are right that the economic and political situation could change, but in Oxford and Cambridge that's not the deal breaker for tunnels.

The deal breaker is that Oxford and Cambridge both have rivers lined with medieval buildings, and city centres that don't have the locations that can tolerate the demolition and disruption required to build underground stations. Look, for example, at the construction sites for the Elizabeth Line stations at Farringdon and Tottenham Court Road. The old Cambridge city centre doesn't have any sites that could cope with the demolition and disruption required, and I doubt that Oxford has either.

Furthermore, Crossrail didn't have to go under the Thames, and the Tyne and Wear Metro had a derelict waterfront way below the city, not medieval chapels, cloisters and wine cellars near to the river.

While tunneling and major construction works are not impossible in historic cities (they managed to build a metro under the Colosseum in Rome) it is far more expensive and disruptive than usual as you point out. It's not easy to get any form of frequent public transport through areas with medieval buildings and narrow streets, but it wouldn't be that difficult to lay tram tracks in e.g. High Street in Oxford or East Road / Sidney Street in Cambridge. Still doesn't go through the busiest areas but it gets close enough without causing too much disruption. This is probably as good of an urban mass transit network as you can get in a city like Oxford or Cambridge without becoming unviable to construct - which is why my original idea for Abingdon-Oxford was a tram-train.

 

[JamesT]

While tunneling and major construction works are not impossible in historic cities (they managed to build a metro under the Colosseum in Rome) it is far more expensive and disruptive than usual as you point out. It's not easy to get any form of frequent public transport through areas with medieval buildings and narrow streets, but it wouldn't be that difficult to lay tram tracks in e.g. High Street in Oxford or East Road / Sidney Street in Cambridge. Still doesn't go through the busiest areas but it gets close enough without causing too much disruption. This is probably as good of an urban mass transit network as you can get in a city like Oxford or Cambridge without becoming unviable to construct - which is why my original idea for Abingdon-Oxford was a tram-train.

I think the examples of Edinburgh and indeed Botley Road show the difficulties you would likely face trying to run tram tracks in Oxford. You would also have to look at something other than overhead wiring to power it. Electric trams were rejected over a hundred years ago and the conservation lobby is even stronger now. The High Street still looks similar to the view in JMW Turner’s famous painting, losing that would be fiercely resisted.

 

[Farigiraf]

You would also have to look at something other than overhead wiring to power it. Electric trams were rejected over a hundred years ago and the conservation lobby is even stronger now. The High Street still looks similar to the view in JMW Turner’s famous painting, losing that would be fiercely resisted.

It's been proven in multiple cities (e.g. Bordeaux, Lyon, Birmingham) that you can use OHLE in the outer city parts and battery in the city centres, so that wouldn't be a problem.
In my opinion Oxford High Street would look much better with modern, nice-looking trams running along it instead of a mixture of primarily black, white and grey cars.

 

[JamesT]

It's been proven in multiple cities (e.g. Bordeaux, Lyon, Birmingham) that you can use OHLE in the outer city parts and battery in the city centres, so that wouldn't be a problem.
In my opinion Oxford High Street would look much better with modern, nice-looking trams running along it instead of a mixture of primarily black, white and grey cars.

You mean the taxis? Private cars have been banned during the day for over 25 years. Mostly it’s full of buses.

 

[Farigiraf]

You mean the taxis? Private cars have been banned during the day for over 25 years. Mostly it’s full of buses.

Was not aware of that, thought it was just the narrow streets that were banned to private cars, good to know. If anything that makes it easier as there'd far less opposition to the tram as something which would 'reduce capacity on the road for cars'.
As with everywhere there are difficulties with urban transport projects but once implemented people conveniently forget the troubles of implementing the project and are happy it exists.

 

[Magdalia]

it wouldn't be that difficult to lay tram tracks in e.g. High Street in Oxford or East Road / Sidney Street in Cambridge. Still doesn't go through the busiest areas but it gets close enough without causing too much disruption.

Tram tracks and cycling are not compatible, especially in narrow streets like Sidney Street in Cambridge, which isn't wide enough for 2 tram tracks. Look at how much width is needed for two buses and cycles on the guided busway.

 

[67018]

Tram tracks and cycling are not compatible, especially in narrow streets like Sidney Street in Cambridge, which isn't wide enough for 2 tram tracks. Look at how much width is needed for two buses and cycles on the guided busway.

Really? What about somewhere like Amsterdam, which seems to manage just fine with even more cyclists than Oxford as well as its fair share of old buildings and other geographical constraints.

Having said that, I'm not convinced the immense cost and disruption of a tram network is justified in Oxford compared to better integrated buses feeding into the rail services. Bus priorities seem to be a bit of a hot potato in the city though, judging by the ongoing rumbles about the bus gates.

 

[Brubulus]

I think that a light metro would be an incredibly good idea for the Oxford region. It would also be incredibly expensive. My preferred route would be Shippon Airfield - Abingdon - Radley - Kensington - Littlemore - Cowley - Headington South - Headington North - University - Station - Wolvercoye - Eynsham - Witney - Carterton. It would be a multi billion pound project that would transform the region and massively increase productivity.

 

[Magdalia]

What about somewhere like Amsterdam, which seems to manage just fine with even more cyclists

It is a long while since I was in Amsterdam. But looking at pictures of Amsterdam trams, the streetscapes are completely different from Cambridge, and I can't find any pictures with both trams and cyclists. Amsterdam may have space to segregate trams and cycles but Cambridge does not, and I doubt that Oxford streets are big enough for segregated trams and cycles either.

 

[cle]

It is a shame that the likes of Witney and Abingdon are unlikely to ever rejoin the heavy rail network... and if commuting and business growth into Oxford continues to develop, much in the same vein as Cambridge and in comparable sectors, something will need to change.

That said, Oxford Parkway is a 'good thing' - and could do much more of a role in terms of railhead, development point (think Reading Green Park or Cambridge North) - it will have 4tph into Oxford, more in time and same to Bicester - plus direct services to London and to Milton Keynes. It's a great place to build out campuses.

If Cowley is done and subsequently gets above 2tph, there is at least one arc of suburban rail within Oxford which again will support existing development but hopefully spur on a lot more.

The problem is also that people who work in Oxford come from a very wide and eclectic net of places, combine that with the age/nature of the place and construction/roading challenges - and it feels like feeder busways/bike lanes etc into places like Cowley or Parkway, or Hanborough - might be as good as it gets.

 

[67018]

It is a long while since I was in Amsterdam. But looking at pictures of Amsterdam trams, the streetscapes are completely different from Cambridge, and I can't find any pictures with both trams and cyclists. Amsterdam may have space to segregate trams and cycles but Cambridge does not, and I doubt that Oxford streets are big enough for segregated trams and cycles either.

The streetscapes in the centre look fairly similar to Oxford to me. In some narrow streets there is single track bidirectional running.

Part of the difference may be what you mean by 'segregation' - in the UK we seem to insist on massive and expensive segregation measures, as the Cambridge busway saga shows. Most European cities seem to get by with something a lot simpler and cheaper.

That said, Oxford Parkway is a 'good thing' - and could do much more of a role in terms of railhead, development point (think Reading Green Park or Cambridge North) - it will have 4tph into Oxford, more in time and same to Bicester - plus direct services to London and to Milton Keynes. It's a great place to build out campuses.

This is already happening - the red building in Oxford North has just opened (see https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c79vjgnwny1o) and the golf club next to Oxford Parkway is going to be redeveloped. Seems to make a lot of sense to me as the area where the A34/A40/A44 meet is a tangle of roads and so hardly pristine countryside.

 

[The exile]

Most European cities seem to get by with something a lot simpler and cheaper.

Called “Dear cyclist, it is 100% your responsibility to avoid those big things called trams and not to fall into the rails they run on. If you ignore the last sentence you have no one else to blame but yourself.” Of course it helps if the tram is already a long-term fixture that people have grown up knowing rather than a new addition as it inevitably has been in every British instance bar one.

 

[Magdalia]

Part of the difference may be what you mean by 'segregation' - in the UK we seem to insist on massive and expensive segregation measures, as the Cambridge busway saga shows.

The Cambridge Guided Busway has had 3 fatalities.

The court gave its verdict on the health and safety breaches on the Cambridge Guided Busway.

Segregation isn't ambiguous, it means keeping things apart.

Trams sharing narrow city centre streets with cycles in Cambridge is not going to happen, and I doubt that they will in Oxford either.

 

[fishwomp]

The Cambridge Guided Busway has had 3 fatalities.

The court gave its verdict on the health and safety breaches on the Cambridge Guided Busway.

Segregation isn't ambiguous, it means keeping things apart.

Trams sharing narrow city centre streets with cycles in Cambridge is not going to happen, and I doubt that they will in Oxford either.

For those of us who don't read the buses section of rail forums, https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cn5qp1dww16o - this week's court news. If that'd remained a railway, it'd already have been segregated:

Blanket busway speed reduction after deaths​

The council has proposed spending £4.7m on barriers along the length of the busway, which is believed to be the world's longest guided bus route
The speed limit on a busway network where three people have died has been reduced to a blanket 30mph (48km/h) for safety reasons.
Jennifer Taylor, Steve Moir and Kathleen Pitts were killed in collisions on the Cambridgeshire Busway between 2015 and 2021.
The county council was fined £6m earlier this year after the deaths and a judge criticised the authority for its "rigid and blinkered response" to the fatalities.
The speed was 56mph (90 km/h) in some places, and it will also be reduced to 20mph at crossing points as part of what the council said was its "ongoing commitment to ensure its safe operation".

 

[Magdalia]

For those of us who don't read the buses section of rail forums

The discussion is here:

Guided buses: not enough regard for safety?

As a Cambridgeshire taxpayer, I must say I'm totally delighted at the prospect of the council forking out another £4.7 million for fencing Work to add a fence southwards from Long Road starts on 6 October. The cycleway next to the section from Long Road to Biomedical Campus Junction (I made...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[Mag_seven]

Just a gentle reminder that this thread is for the discussion of the "Oxrail 2040 plan".

If anyone wants to discuss anything else then they are free to start a new thread elsewhere or find an on topic existing one.

thanks

 

[67018]

The Cambridge Guided Busway has had 3 fatalities.

The court gave its verdict on the health and safety breaches on the Cambridge Guided Busway.

Segregation isn't ambiguous, it means keeping things apart.

Trams sharing narrow city centre streets with cycles in Cambridge is not going to happen, and I doubt that they will in Oxford either.

The number of road fatalities in the UK is in the thousands per year, but we don't fence off all roads. But trams (and busways) seem to be held to different standards which makes them more costly. In the end, though, the sheer cost and disruption would be enough to make an Oxford tram system unrealistic given that better options exist to achieve at least some of the benefits.

Getting back on topic, there is a section in the document about the 'Oxfordshire Metro' which I very much welcome, not least because it seems entirely feasible to get cracking on it quickly. A single contactless ticketing system, co-ordinated timetables across bus and rail and a network that appears more joined up are pretty well established concepts and shoulw move faster than huge investments in infrastructure.

It will be interesting to see where the West Oxfordshire study goes, as that could end up as heavy rail, tram or some combination.

 

[Zomboid]

A single contactless ticketing system, co-ordinated timetables across bus and rail and a network that appears more joined up are pretty well established concepts and shoulw move faster than huge investments in infrastructure

This is the kind of thing that needs to happen - Oxford Parkway and the proposed Cowley branch stations are within the Smart zone bus pass area, as is the proposed Begbroke station. Having a ticket that's valid on trains within the zone would be a good step forward, especially as the trains between Oxford and Oxford Parkway are set to become close to turn up and go frequency (depends on the spacing) when EWR opens.

Given how the city council want to keep cars out of the centre, better integration of bus and train is something that really ought to be in progress right now.

 

[cle]

This is the kind of thing that needs to happen - Oxford Parkway and the proposed Cowley branch stations are within the Smart zone bus pass area, as is the proposed Begbroke station. Having a ticket that's valid on trains within the zone would be a good step forward, especially as the trains between Oxford and Oxford Parkway are set to become close to turn up and go frequency (depends on the spacing) when EWR opens.

Given how the city council want to keep cars out of the centre, better integration of bus and train is something that really ought to be in progress right now.

This would be a game-changer for integrated modal flow stuff - especially with a bike/scooter hire option for last mile and so forth too. Plus parking, and of course buses and trains... basically just copy Switzerland.

This is already happening - the red building in Oxford North has just opened (see https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c79vjgnwny1o) and the golf club next to Oxford Parkway is going to be redeveloped. Seems to make a lot of sense to me as the area where the A34/A40/A44 meet is a tangle of roads and so hardly pristine countryside.

Great - hope for more of it. It's not quite walking distance to Parkway though. And with the stadium done, it'll really mirror Green Park!

The number of road fatalities in the UK is in the thousands per year, but we don't fence off all roads. But trams (and busways) seem to be held to different standards which makes them more costly. In the end, though, the sheer cost and disruption would be enough to make an Oxford tram system unrealistic given that better options exist to achieve at least some of the benefits.

Sounds like Brightline in FL! People die on roads... nobody limits cars to 70mph for example.