• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Oxford Corridor Phase 2 & Platform 5 updates

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
34,327
Thanks for the lovely photos. I think the east-side footbridge is future-proofed to be capable of carrying trains, if the east side of the station is totally rebuilt, and acquires a new through platform 2. Any discussion of that, probably belongs in a very speculative thread!
Earlier in this thread it was confirmed the ‘footbridge’ span is already the same design as the new P5 rail span, and an additional footbridge of a lighter construction will be added as and when needed, I’ll try and find a link. Seems it’s post #703 that has links to the NR explanation.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

reddragon

Established Member
Joined
24 Mar 2016
Messages
3,275
Location
Churn (closed)
It'll be pretty bad in the coming months: Botley Road is the only legal car route for non permit-holders to reach the Westgate Centre - and that used to share its traffic with Abingdon Road.. the run up to Christmas will be something to behold now! Obviously a lot of people have permits (Oxford residents: 100 days, Oxfordshire: 25 days) - which are quite reasonable for occasional shopping/other needs but not designed for commuters - and they can use the other roads.

Wondering when the first "close the road again" group will form!
The traffic chaos caused by the queue to enter Westgate Car park alone is enough to restrict traffic, especially when it fills up, which is quickly.

Why should Oxford be gridlocked, buses delayed and pollution everywhere just so a few people can queue for a car park?

I remember Oxford before the traffic restrictions came in, and I can assure you that traffic was far worse, buses couldn't move and the place was awful.

The city was not designed for the car.
 

djox

Member
Joined
25 Jan 2025
Messages
80
Location
Oxford
I remember Oxford before the traffic restrictions came in, and I can assure you that traffic was far worse, buses couldn't move and the place was awful.
Exactly, people quickly forgot how bad Oxford traffic has been for years.
Only 10% of Westgate visitors arrive by car yet cause a lot of the hold ups.
 

officewalla

Member
Joined
22 Apr 2019
Messages
222
Location
South of England
This "improvement" has done nothing to help people who commute to anywhere beyond Botley Rd and has most likely made it worse with the traffic filters for those who work at the station for example.

If a journey to book on would have taken 45 minutes with the congestion charge down Abingdon Rd as an example, what happens when Botley Rd adds another 20-30 minutes and personnel are now outside the hour stipulated to be able to get into work?

Will management accept not being able to get to the booking on point on time if an employee leave home 60 minutes before their booking on time but finds themselves in the Oxford gridlock?

Will fatigue indices be amended or will the answer just be that employees will need to leave home earlier? Anybody got any experience of these types of scenarios?
 

SynthD

Established Member
Joined
4 Apr 2020
Messages
2,063
Location
UK
Wait for people to alter their habits around the traffic filters. It's too soon to tell.
 

fishwomp

Established Member
Joined
5 Jan 2020
Messages
1,373
Location
milton keynes
I remember Oxford before the traffic restrictions came in, and I can assure you that traffic was far worse, buses couldn't move and the place was awful.
Oxford screams every time something reduces car flexibility, even though the status quo is utterly useless traffic snarlery!

You might remember this set of restrictions, and perhaps also remember the previous generations?.. bus on Cornmarket, High St, Broad St as a through roads etc!

If anyone wants to see what the High was like, there's plenty of Morse episodes of him stuck in traffic on the High! no-one serious proposes undoing it now!
 

The exile

Established Member
Joined
31 Mar 2010
Messages
9,538
Location
Somerset
Oxford screams every time something reduces car flexibility, even though the status quo is utterly useless traffic snarlery!
No doubt, in common with most motorists they are all in favour of restrictions - but only ones that only affect other people. “Traffic” is other people!
 

GRALISTAIR

Established Member
Joined
11 Apr 2012
Messages
10,592
Location
Preston Lancs
No doubt, in common with most motorists they are all in favour of restrictions - but only ones that only affect other people. “Traffic” is other people!
Yes, I remember in the 1980s , they wanted people to get out of their cars and use public transport ( to free up room so they could use their cars!!!)
 

tripleseis

Member
Joined
7 Sep 2008
Messages
208
The traffic chaos caused by the queue to enter Westgate Car park alone is enough to restrict traffic, especially when it fills up, which is quickly.

Why should Oxford be gridlocked, buses delayed and pollution everywhere just so a few people can queue for a car park?

I remember Oxford before the traffic restrictions came in, and I can assure you that traffic was far worse, buses couldn't move and the place was awful.

The city was not designed for the car.

I am just old enough to remember the queues of traffic and poor air quality on the High Street before the bus gate was introduced.

Sometimes jumping off the bus by Queens Lane and walking was far quicker than staying on the bus to Carfax. Things definitely got so much better once it was introduced.
 

Jimini

Established Member
Joined
8 Oct 2006
Messages
2,186
Location
Reading
I never thought I'd post something like this, but my employer of many years has randomly cottoned on to this and pubished an article a few days ago :lol:

A ‘Ludicrously Ugly’ Bridge Is Exhibit A That Britain Has Lost Its Mojo The new 20-yard structure in Oxford took longer to build than the Eiffel Tower and the Titanic—and cost more

OXFORD, England—Venice has the Rialto. San Francisco has its Golden Gate. Oxford has the…wait a minute, how much did that new bridge cost?

This city of dreaming spires has lit the Promethean flame under poets and artists for centuries, but its latest architectural offering—20-yard rail and foot bridges connecting Oxford Station over Botley Road—has underwhelmed. Especially as the structures cost over a quarter of a billion dollars, and, to some, are giving nothing but “loveless ugliness.”

During more than a decade of Britain’s tinkering and planning, China built the world’s highest bridge and Canada forged a river crossing to the U.S.
In centuries past, the British built the Titanic in less time and for less money. The French erected the Eiffel Tower more quickly and cheaply, even after adjusting for inflation.
Detractors say it’s Exhibit A that Britain has lost its mojo.
“That can happen to a country,” said Julian Le Vay, a former director of finance and procurement for Britain’s prison service. He led a campaign to highlight the economic damage to local businesses during construction.
Planners said the project would close a key route into the city center for four to five days. That turned into 41 months.

Adding insult to injury, the end result is drab. “Literally at no point did anyone say, ‘Well, clearly this is getting out of control, but also—what are we doing to Oxford?’” said Nicholas Boys Smith, founder and chairman at Create Streets, a think tank specializing in urban design.

“On arriving in Oxford by train, you should think ‘Wow,’” he said. But then there is “this ludicrously ugly bridge.”

It wasn’t supposed to be this way. The Oxford Station Masterplan said its mission was to reflect the city’s world-class status.
It was one of the first projects under a new government program: swift, pragmatic and efficient enhancement delivery. SPEED for short. The aim was to halve the time it takes to complete a rail-infrastructure project and slash the cost of project delivery.

But when they got going, builders hit a thicket of utilities running under the road. They needed to lower the carriageway by around 16 inches to let standard double-decker buses pass under the bridges.

Other setbacks included the discovery of a 109-yard upside-down arch designed by the Victorians to reduce flooding—a finding described by Network Rail as the “point of no return” for the closure of the road. They also found a World War II grenade, which threw, well, another grenade into the schedule.

One contractor said it was the most complex project he’d ever worked on.
Modern Britain is beset by planning delays, project overruns and ballooning infrastructure budgets. The postponements are so frequent and the sums so astronomical that it’s becoming a sport among the literati to come up with new ways to make the numbers make sense.

The superfast 140-mile rail line between London and Birmingham will cost up to $971 million a mile by the time it’s fully open—currently estimated for 2040 at the earliest. And that’s after the government cut the route by almost 60% to save money. A 3.3-mile stretch of a branch line to be re-laid in Portishead, southwest England, required 79,187 pages of planning documents.

“There’s 14.6 miles of paperwork, more than 4½ times the length of the line that is to be reinstated,” calculated Ben Hopkinson, head of infrastructure at the Centre for Policy Studies, a center-right think tank.

On average, the U.K. pays 65% more per unit of infrastructure than comparable countries, according to a study by Britain Remade, a group campaigning for faster economic growth, and the Centre for British Progress, a nonpartisan think tank.

In other words, Britain gets less for more.
Analysts blame the number of planning, environmental and legal hoops that projects now have to pass through. Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander was more blunt. “This country can build big things—we just need competent people at the helm to deliver them,” she told lawmakers in May.

Some who saw Oxford’s Botley Road bridges after their unveiling said they could understand the delays and expense.

“There are things in the ground you can’t see,” said Graham Wood, who works in construction, before walking under the bridge. “X-ray vision would be great, but they haven’t invented it.”
Others were less forgiving. When Dominika Mikitiuk, a veterinarian visiting from eastern Poland, saw the bridge and heard the $314 million price tag, the 30-year-old had one question: “Just for that?”

As the problems piled up, businesses closed or relocated and residents became more irate, the project pivoted in January 2025 from reimagining Oxford station to just getting the road back open by August this year.

A month before that deadline, Network Rail discovered three gas leaks.
When they were fixed and the road under the bridges opened late last month, a local brewery threw a party to celebrate. They wore hard hats and smashed a bridge-shaped piñata.

Local merchants and residents said Network Rail, which owns and operates Britain’s rail infrastructure, also invited them to a party to thank them for their patience. Those who spoke with The Wall Street Journal said they declined.

A proposed opening ceremony was scrapped.

“I think they were so embarrassed,” said Zack Iqbal, 55, who runs a garage near the project. “It’s a functional structure, but it’s so underwhelming.”

Iqbal ordered a plaque for the bridge (parodying the kind found on historic buildings) with the inscription: “To commemorate the three years of chaos…and £millions wasted…to build a bridge.”
Network Rail discussed a formal opening event with Oxford City Council and agreed “it would not be appropriate given the challenges and delays,” a spokesman said.

But it’s not the end of the line for the unfinished project. Network Rail invited locals to discuss the next steps over tea and cake this week...
 

takno

Verified Rep - Traksy
Joined
9 Jul 2016
Messages
6,619
I never thought I'd post something like this, but my employer of many years has randomly cottoned on to this and pubished an article a few days ago :lol:

A ‘Ludicrously Ugly’ Bridge Is Exhibit A That Britain Has Lost Its Mojo The new 20-yard structure in Oxford took longer to build than the Eiffel Tower and the Titanic—and cost more
This is a glorious piece of satire. Edwardian Britain produced a single use boat which killed hundreds more cheaply. The Eiffel tower, a completely useless and rather ugly temporary exhibit, was knocked up on a piece of clear land more quickly.
Modern engineering has to waste money keeping a record of where they put their inverted arches, so that future developers aren't left guessing.

The absolute topping is to include a quote from the CPS, like they are a respectable policy group.
 

WAO

Established Member
Joined
10 Mar 2019
Messages
1,246
If I've read this column correctly, the bridge itself (abutments and decks) was built over a few months this year, probably at modest cost. The rest of the work was underground and being unpredictable and complex in the extreme, did not lend itself to modern project management.

Other "expensive" railway projects such as the Farnworth tunnel and the extensive groundwork around Ravensthorpe were caused by the poor ground conditions, both from nature and the hand of man.

WAO
 

fishwomp

Established Member
Joined
5 Jan 2020
Messages
1,373
Location
milton keynes
This is a glorious piece of satire. Edwardian Britain produced a single use boat which killed hundreds more cheaply. The Eiffel tower, a completely useless and rather ugly temporary exhibit, was knocked up on a piece of clear land more quickly.
Modern engineering has to waste money keeping a record of where they put their inverted arches, so that future developers aren't left guessing.

Obviously those building the Victorian inverted arches, along with their generation achieving fine feats engineering, must've skimped on the CAD drawings that would've come in handy ;)

It seems to me that the WSJ would've been happy at the cost had the bridge looked different. It may have been syndicated rather than commission by WSJ as I think I've read similar elsewhere.

The funny thing to me is that it seems that article has a pre-conceived opinion and selected quote to make sure it is supported: so many people saying the bridge looks ugly - and yet the look of it is something that I have not heard anyone in Oxford comment on. The duration, yes, the look, no.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
34,327
I have walked alongside and over the new bridge, and passed over it by train, and it looks perfectly good to me! What did people expect, a replica of the Forth or Golden Gate Bridges?!!
Perhaps they hoped for Hanging Gardens of Babylon. As John Cleese once said…
 

Top