Oxford improvements could have been done differently

[cle]

Moderator note: Split from

Oxford Corridor Phase 2 & Platform 5 updates

Local media in Oxford is reporting it is planned to close Oxford station for 3 months next summer, so the bridge over Botley road can be replaced. Does anyone know any more details on this? I would presume this means the whole line will be closed for that time, but that seems awefully long...

www.railforums.co.uk

Could a bay be added to the p4/5 island - at either end? Is the width there (or could it be?)

A north-facing one could cover the maybe-never Moor St, or Banbury locals, or even the Oxford starters to the Cotswolds lines which used to run.
South could be the Bristol, or if long enough, the Didcot semi if it returns. Keep the throughs, through... ?

 

[zwk500]

Could a bay be added to the p4/5 island - at either end? Is the width there (or could it be?)

A north-facing one could cover the maybe-never Moor St, or Banbury locals, or even the Oxford starters to the Cotswolds lines which used to run.
South could be the Bristol, or if long enough, the Didcot semi if it returns. Keep the throughs, through... ?

Not without eating into the length of one platform or another. Platform 4 will form a central terminating road to a large extent, and then you've got the extensive sidings at either end for additional capacity.

 

[hwl]

Could a bay be added to the p4/5 island - at either end?

No

Is the width there

No

(or could it be?)

No

A north-facing one could cover the maybe-never Moor St, or Banbury locals,

The more pressing issue is the two MK services and few more tph to follow.

or even the Oxford starters to the Cotswolds lines which used to run.

Those are and will be though 80x for a long time to come.

South could be the Bristol, or if long enough, the Didcot semi if it returns. Keep the throughs, through... ?

 

[swt_passenger]

Not without eating into the length of one platform or another. Platform 4 will form a central terminating road to a large extent, and then you've got the extensive sidings at either end for additional capacity.

I think both ends would also need additional bridge spans, even if the island was wide enough. (ie over Botley Rd and over the Sheepwash river channel.)

 

[Merioneth]

The

The best course of action would have been to build an entirely new station on the car park south of the bridge, and not have sold off the yard (cheap) to allow the ghastly “Oxford Student Castle” to be built.

There would have been plenty of space for the four through lines, at least two pairs of islands, and terminating bays (at either or both ends).

This could have been done without any serious disruption to services and the bridge could have been replaced without much disruption; with the ability to terminate on each side. After the new station opened, the old one to the north could have been removed and a decent civic space (plus expansion of the Saïd Business School) could have made a decent contribution to the costs.
As for car parking; demand is low… perhaps 10% of the original spaces. There would be room to replace it on the site of the old goods yard (still vacant), or not bother (making the delightfully anti-motoring councils happy).

I say this as one who works 130 yards from the Osney Lane footbridge, and often uses the train to get into Oxford…

Paul

 

[Zomboid]

This could have been done without any serious disruption to services and the bridge could have been replaced without much disruption

No it couldn't. If you're replacing the bridge then the inverted arch and all the other subterranean mysteries would have made themselves known.

 

[Merioneth]

No it couldn't. If you're replacing the bridge then the inverted arch and all the other subterranean mysteries would have made themselves known.

The bridge replacement could have been much simpler, with the track raised snd the road moved north.

 

[zwk500]

The bridge replacement could have been much simpler, with the track raised snd the road moved north.

Raising the tracks would only have been possible with an extremely disruptive extended rail closure. There's plenty of freight as well as through GWR and XC services that would need to get from one side of Oxford to the other.

 

[The Planner]

The bridge replacement could have been much simpler, with the track raised snd the road moved north.

Sort of suggests you haven't looked at the layout of Oxford. You'll be doing that to half the station as well.

 

[cle]

No

No

No

The more pressing issue is the two MK services and few more tph to follow.

Those are and will be though 80x for a long time to come.

I thought as much. The only other option could be taking one of the through freight lines over, and building a wider island between that road (the western one) - and the future p5. Which might enable a bay, likely shorter at the Didcot end (which is where you'd want a longer one) - and somewhat less constrained at the top. But really you'd shift the whole island northwards if you were doing that, as the bridge roads are fairly prescriptive! Stabling 8 car 387s would be a goal for a new bay (and thus 5 car 80x)

I think the freight traffic could cope with a single bi-di through road?

 

[Zomboid]

There's the river bridge immediately to the north (another issue with relocation of the platforms).

 

[Merioneth]

Sort of suggests you haven't looked at the layout of Oxford. You'll be doing that to half the station as well.

I look at it every day… Bureaucracy wins every time public money is involved.

 

[The Planner]

I look at it every day… Bureaucracy wins every time public money is involved.

Also the loss of revenue and compensation involved to close Oxford station for a significant period of time.

 

[fishwomp]

There's the river bridge immediately to the north (another issue with relocation of the platforms).

That river bridge north of the station is also needing attention for the current plan - there will be a new deck put in (currently a road, formerly a railway).

TBH, There are a lot of things that would have been different with hindsight - but that's hindsight for you. They started digging a hole in Botley Road, and the solution was obvious then .. keep digging!

 

[The exile]

The bridge replacement could have been much simpler, with the track raised snd the road moved north.

Does that not make the fairly sweeping assumption that doing so could have been done without encountering similar “unknowns” - over a much wider area, since raising the trackbed in an urban area is unlikely to mean just bunging a coupke of feet of hardcore on top of the existing embankment?

 

[fishwomp]

Does that not make the fairly sweeping assumption that doing so could have been done without encountering similar “unknowns” - over a much wider area, since raising the trackbed in an urban area is unlikely to mean just bunging a coupke of feet of hardcore on top of the existing embankment?

Well .. it's easier to dig upwards than downwards.

Going higher would have had its merits. The river and canal cannot be lowered easily.

* Flooding of the railway isn't an issue in the immediate area - I don't recall any blockages near the station in the last decades, ( 2 miles south at the bottom of Hinksey yard does - S&T cabinets are on stilts but the trackbed is still at risk.)

* The bridge immediately north of the station is too low for tall people, or cyclists - so a bit of a 'headache' ..

* The bridge over the Thames south of the station (400 yards south ish) is also low, not as low as the one above due to the weir between the two points, but low enough to need to keep head down on the bike.

The council intends to build a new footbridge and cycle bridge nearly adjacent to this southern bridge, to provide easier access to more development on land next to the river (north side of) and to existing businesses and communities on the west side of the river - which will increase footfall going under the railway bridge, but that footpath will still be susceptible to the flooding during the usual rainy seasons.. and so an important green route in will be unsafe a handful of weeks per year - and if the railway were raised, the path could go up a bit.

So, yeah, Botley Road bridge is sorted.. the road will be going lower now, with extra pumps for the water...

.. but you can see how non-railway projects are surely cursing the low height of the railway within a few hundred yards..

Joined up thinking eh? Certainly hindsight too though.

 

[The exile]

Well .. it's easier to dig upwards than downwards.

Except going upwards also requires digging downwards - and to raise the railway (and presumably then the station) would have meant doing that over a far wider area. Moving the bridge north would have meant new abutment foundations (which would possibly necessitate digging further downwards than the existing abutments went) - all with the associated risk of finding “something nasty under the woodshed”

 

[fishwomp]

Except going upwards also requires digging downwards -

I'd expect so, but less of it - Botley Road has required digging a wide bit of land down further than it's been in 150 years.

In some cases you can jack a bridge (see that recent iron one on TPU between Cross Gates and Micklefield), I'm no structural or civil engineer, and others (say at Huddersfield, they took the bridge off John William St in August, poured concrete to sit on (the right amount in right places), and put a new bridge on top at same height - but it does show that 150 year old structures can still be used for brand new bridges.

and to raise the railway (and presumably then the station) would have meant doing that over a far wider area.

Yes, but 3ft raised over 200 yards is 1 in 200 - or 3ft raise in 100 yards is 1 in 100 - that's a very very short length indeed and nothing-gradients - but that's addtional to the 1 in 161 northbound and 1 in 600 southbound approaches. I'd consider whether to go further south just to raise that southern bridge - or be prepared to do it when that is replaced whenever in the future but that's a good way south relative to 100 yards!

Considering the station's west side is being rebuilt for new platform, that's no issue (sure, the footbridge, but that's small beer)... the east side would need to raise all platforms, including the Chiltern platforms, so yeah, a bit of a pain.

All told, had the Botley Rd bridge been the easy change they expected, you wouldn't do the above... but if someone had said 'there be trolls that'll take all your money under the Botley Rd bridge', 'and you'll p*ss off the burghers of Oxford' then maybe the other idea would've been cheaper and less controversial. As I said, earlier - the bridge north of the station needs attention anyway as it's needing a new span for the new (platform 5) line.

Moving the bridge north would have meant new abutment foundations (which would possibly necessitate digging further downwards than the existing abutments went) - all with the associated risk of finding “something nasty under the woodshed”

To clarify: not moving any bridge north - just raising the existing bridge!

 

[zwk500]

To clarify: not moving any bridge north - just raising the existing bridge!

'just' is being asked to do something rather heroic there.

 

[The exile]

To clarify: not moving any bridge north - just raising the existing bridge!

You may not be suggesting moving the road, but Merioneth, to whom I was responding, certainly was.

 

[fishwomp]

'just' is being asked to do something rather heroic there.

I think the phrase is 'just' is being asked to do some heavy lifting

 

[Falcon1200]

To clarify: not moving any bridge north - just raising the existing bridge!

That would require a huge amount of work on, and cause huge disruption to, the railway! The track for a long way either side would have to be raised, to maintain line speed, including right through the platforms (to avoid them being on a gradient), this in turn would need the bridge over Castle Mill Stream to be raised, this would then affect the pointwork north of the station, and the carriage sidings.

 

[Zomboid]

Raise the track means flatten the station and start again.

And whilst there may be some merit to that idea, nobody would have done it to avoid digging up Botley Road - and it probably wouldn't actually have been possible to do it without digging up Botley Road and ending up exactly where we are now anyway.

 

[hwl]

Raise the track means flatten the station and start again.

And whilst there may be some merit to that idea, nobody would have done it to avoid digging up Botley Road - and it probably wouldn't actually have been possible to do it without digging up Botley Road and ending up exactly where we are now anyway.

Exactly, much wishful straw grasping at the moment in some quarters.

 

[Stewart2887]

What a farce this has become. A long time ago. Whoever thought closing the Botley Road bridge should refund the bus fares for those of us who have to get off at Osney and walk the rest. We didn't need more clearance under the bridge; the Wantage/Witney/Swindon double deckers fitted comfortably under already. Now we've got Oxford's stupid traffic filters which means I can't avoid paying the charge to drop off at the station. Someone needs to give their head a wobble. All for an extra platform at Oxford. Rant over.

 

[Merioneth]

Except going upwards also requires digging downwards - and to raise the railway (and presumably then the station) would have meant doing that over a far wider area. Moving the bridge north would have meant new abutment foundations (which would possibly necessitate digging further downwards than the existing abutments went) - all with the associated risk of finding “something nasty under the woodshed”

You may not be suggesting moving the road, but Merioneth, to whom I was responding, certainly was.

I certainly was. There is a huge amount of room both north and south of Oxford station. I have used it extensively, worked next to it, and I was one of the University team who moved Rewley Road to Quainton.

This forum is populated with many nay-sayers, often claiming professional knowledge. I have been involved in many large projects, having to raise the money first, before managing the overall build.

Where money is tight people get on with things. Public money seems to drag things out, gold-plate bureaucracy, and waste everything. Look at the cost of Oxford Parkway and Bicester Village stations, paid for by Chiltern, to the shameful waste that is Bow Street.

Raising the track and building a new bridge are simple tasks. However, people like to complicate things.

Do it in six months and you have six months of support staff, plus x person hours of the actual workers. Do it in five years and you’ll have ten times the overhead, even if the workers’ hours are the same.

Tesco understands this. When they moved their Bicester store they built a quality new road junction in six weeks. Oxfordshire CC/the DFT spent two years and tens of millions to mess around with two plain vanilla roundabouts in North Oxford…

So, just do it!

Paul

 

[Merioneth]

That would require a huge amount of work on, and cause huge disruption to, the railway! The track for a long way either side would have to be raised, to maintain line speed, including right through the platforms (to avoid them being on a gradient), this in turn would need the bridge over Castle Mill Stream to be raised, this would then affect the pointwork north of the station, and the carriage sidings.

It would take a few days…

 

[The exile]

It would take a few days…

“A few” as in “with three noughts at the end?!”

 

[Wyrleybart]

Someone needs to give their head a wobble. All for an extra platform at Oxford. Rant over.

That statement is somewhat economic with the truth surely ?

Oxford is a busy city with a matching train service. There is no way you can reliably operate such a timetable from two through platforms and two bays - especially when more through platform use will be required to run through Oxford on the Cowley services.

 

[Falcon1200]

There is no way you can reliably operate such a timetable from two through platforms and two bays - especially when more through platform use will be required to run through Oxford on the Cowley services.

Indeed, and the mettle has finally been grasped, at the expense certainly of much short term pain but the benefits will be worth it.

(I may have mentioned before an issue of the Railway Magazine with an article entitled 'Oxford - An operational problem' - Dating from 1954! The issue should really have been addressed decades ago, but thankfully it is now, finally.