Chiltern Oxford Link completed

[Andyjs247]

Yes, It's not as if the level crossing is on a critical http://www.railforums.co.uk/images/editor/attach.gifroute anyway - through traffic goes round the ring road or straight down King's End to the A41. Although pedestrianisation would make road access to Bicester Town Station a bit difficult just at the time when more people will want to use it.

What will be more of a problem is when East West Rail opens, with the level crossing on the A4421 which is the main road round the town. Does anyone know how long the barriers are likely to be down there?

I would imagine that Network Rail will look to close the crossing on the A4421 at Charbridge Lane (Bicester perimeter road). Plans for this part of the route relate only to East West rail so are yet to be announced. As things stand there will be 4tph across the crossing here - 1 tph Oxford - MK plus 1tph Oxford - Bedford (and vice versa) . Barriers would likely be down for maybe 10 minutes per hour, IF the crossing remains that is.

Totally get that the crossing over the B4100 London Road isn't going anywhere.

Yes the crossing on the B4100 at London Road will remain - there is no viable alternative, i.e. no space to build a road bridge without the ramps being too steep. There will be a pedestrian footbridge however.

This crossing will eventually get 8tph - 2tph Oxford - Marylebone (and vice versa) plus the 4tph on EWR. So closed for 20-25 minutes in an hour probably. Just to add, the current crossing is train man operated which necessarily takes longer now than it will when automated.

 

[The Planner]

I bet it doesn't get closed. It will just get upgraded to a MCB-OD crossing I suspect.

 

[Eagle]

Is the line at that point planned to be redoubled?

 

[The Planner]

Still too early to say, logic would say yes, money and service spec may say no. I suspect Bicester to Bletchley may be single with a long dynamic loop with the old favourite of passive provision for the second track.

 

[swt_passenger]

The GRIP 4 report (on the EWR website) has 3 options shown but all have double track throughout between Bicester Town and Bletchley.

Page 90/92/94 of this (big file, 228 page pdf):

http://eastwestrail.org.uk/wordpres...-Rail-GRIP4-Business-Case-Report-Jul-2010.pdf

The variations seem to be more to do with provision (or not) of various freight loops...

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

From the Network Rail response to the ORR CP5 draft determination this week:

For East West Rail, the output specification for the project continues to develop. The
development project scope is therefore at a relatively early stage (i.e. GRIP stage 2 rather
than GRIP stage 4 as assumed in the Draft Determination by ORR). The possibility of
additional scope to deliver the required output specification (such as additional freight
looping facilities, or a fifth line between Bletchley and Milton Keynes) cannot yet be ruled out
until further investigative work has been completed. Similarly, until the effects of the
interface with HS2 at Claydon and, potentially, the relationship with the “Electric Spine”
proposals are assessed, we consider the reduction in funding by the ORR to be premature.

The scope and funding of the project is evidently not yet finalised.

 

[swt_passenger]

That raises an interesting question, because anyone reading the linked document I quoted above from the EWR site might be forgiven for thinking it must have something to do with GRIP 4?

Confused now... :cry:

 

[Andyjs247]

I bet it doesn't get closed. It will just get upgraded to a MCB-OD crossing I suspect.

I was going by what has been decided for the Bicester - Oxford section where (I believe) all crossings are being abolished - the exception being London Road Bicester as already mentioned. It seems to be the current Network Rail policy is to abolish crossings where possible and I would hope that the Bicester - Bletchley section would be upgraded to the same standards. Line speed here could be up to 100mph. Logically it would mean closure of Charbridge Lane crossing (also the ungated crossing at Launton). Less busy crossings west of Bicester (e.g. Langford Lane) are being abolished and replaced by bridges.

However I'm not sure what is happening with the foot crossing at Aristotle Lane in Oxford as I know there were several objections to the proposed closure by Network Rail. In the current September issue of Modern Railways I see the latest plan is not to reinstate a single line along the former LNWR formation between Oxford station and Oxford North Junction - presumably this is only temporary because the Oxford station remodelling is not yet decided. I suspect that Aristotle Lane might survive for a bit longer.

 

[The Planner]

As far as I know all the crossings between Oxford and Bicester have no barriers or are user worked, so they were bound to be abolished. I am still not convinced that the Bicester by-pass one will close.

 

[jimm]

I was going by what has been decided for the Bicester - Oxford section where (I believe) all crossings are being abolished - the exception being London Road Bicester as already mentioned. It seems to be the current Network Rail policy is to abolish crossings where possible and I would hope that the Bicester - Bletchley section would be upgraded to the same standards. Line speed here could be up to 100mph. Logically it would mean closure of Charbridge Lane crossing (also the ungated crossing at Launton). Less busy crossings west of Bicester (e.g. Langford Lane) are being abolished and replaced by bridges.

However I'm not sure what is happening with the foot crossing at Aristotle Lane in Oxford as I know there were several objections to the proposed closure by Network Rail. In the current September issue of Modern Railways I see the latest plan is not to reinstate a single line along the former LNWR formation between Oxford station and Oxford North Junction - presumably this is only temporary because the Oxford station remodelling is not yet decided. I suspect that Aristotle Lane might survive for a bit longer.

The objections at Aristotle Lane are just from a few locals who seem to find the idea of using the ramped bridge right next to the crossing to get to their allotments across the line deeply offensive. Why the railway has put up with the crossing's existence for so long beats me. And a shiny new bridge is going to be provided anyway.

The rebuilt Oxford North junction will be just north of the crossing, with trains switching lines here there and everywhere. So that crossing is going.

This story (bit at the bottom) from the local paper gives a flavour of the kind of people Network Rail is up against over this.

http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/10...60_70mph_on___city_link_in_spite_of_protests/

 

[67018]

There is a big difference between the minor crossings between Bicester and Oxford (including one where the Oxfordshire Way actually follows the line for a few yards) and Charbridge Lane though. The latter is a 50mph road which is the main through route from further north to the A41,as well as carrying a lot of traffic to the surrounding industrial estates. Any delays on it are likely to result in increased congestion in the town.

Best solution would probably be to raise the road over the railway, but since the level crossing is already in existence Network Rail might say it's the highway authority's problem and should be resolved at their expense.

 

[Eagle]

There is a big difference between the minor crossings between Bicester and Oxford (including one where the Oxfordshire Way actually follows the line for a few yards) and Charbridge Lane though. The latter is a 50mph road which is the main through route from further north to the A41,as well as carrying a lot of traffic to the surrounding industrial estates. Any delays on it are likely to result in increased congestion in the town.

Although I guess it might be somewhat alleviated now since Vendée Drive opened, meaning some traffic may now go round the south of town.

 

[The Planner]

Makes it a bit of a dog leg, wonder if that will ever go through the MoD site at Graven Hill to meet up with London Road again. I have heard that the MoD want to sell off some of Graven Hill.

 

[67018]

Makes it a bit of a dog leg, wonder if that will ever go through the MoD site at Graven Hill to meet up with London Road again. I have heard that the MoD want to sell off some of Graven Hill.

I don't think the council want to promote too much traffic going round the west of the town - not least because of the awkward road layout under the railway Northwest of Bicester North Station.

A road through Graven Hill is included in the draft Bicester masterplan (lots of links here http://www.cherwell.gov.uk/index.cfm?articleid=8476). And - bingo! - buried in there is a rebuild of the ring road in the North East, which could be an opportunity to replace the level crossing. Currently pencilled in for 2012-2026 though. This plan's been out for consultation about a year now, so lots of this is probably still not agreed.

 

[Andyjs247]

There is a big difference between the minor crossings between Bicester and Oxford (including one where the Oxfordshire Way actually follows the line for a few yards) and Charbridge Lane though. The latter is a 50mph road which is the main through route from further north to the A41,as well as carrying a lot of traffic to the surrounding industrial estates. Any delays on it are likely to result in increased congestion in the town.

Best solution would probably be to raise the road over the railway, but since the level crossing is already in existence Network Rail might say it's the highway authority's problem and should be resolved at their expense.

I agree the best solution would be to put a bridge over the railway. Unlike at London Road there would be enough space for ramps - you could probably build a bridge slightly to the south on a new alignment whilst the existing road remains open, then close crossing once the bridge is completed.

The A4421 is not really the main through route from further north - that's the M40. It is however part of the main route between Bicester and the M40 (in particular for HGV traffic and the industrial estates) around the south and east of town. It can get quite busy if there is any incident on the M40 though, being an alternative route and the best one for HGVs. The shortest route through the centre of town is unsuitable for HGVs being height restricted (due to the railway bridges) and also weight restricted.

Although I guess it might be somewhat alleviated now since Vendée Drive opened, meaning some traffic may now go round the south of town.

The A4421 does go round the south. Vendée Drive doesn't change that. More to the point HGV recommended routes haven't changed.

I don't think the council want to promote too much traffic going round the west of the town - not least because of the awkward road layout under the railway Northwest of Bicester North Station.

That's partly why the recommended route is via the A4421 to the south and east of town. A level crossing closed for 10 minutes in every hour may encourage traffic to take an alternative route through town.

A road through Graven Hill is included in the draft Bicester masterplan (lots of links here http://www.cherwell.gov.uk/index.cfm?articleid=8476). And - bingo! - buried in there is a rebuild of the ring road in the North East, which could be an opportunity to replace the level crossing. Currently pencilled in for 2012-2026 though. This plan's been out for consultation about a year now, so lots of this is probably still not agreed.

A road through Graven Hill won't affect Charbridge Lane though. It would be to bypass part of the A41 between Bicester and the M40 which will likely become more congested once the new Tesco, Bicester Village expansion, Kingsmere and business park developments are completed.

 

[cjp]

I would imagine that Network Rail will look to close the crossing on the A4421 at Charbridge Lane (Bicester perimeter road). Plans for this part of the route relate only to East West rail so are yet to be announced. As things stand there will be 4tph across the crossing here - 1 tph Oxford - MK plus 1tph Oxford - Bedford (and vice versa) . Barriers would likely be down for maybe 10 minutes per hour, IF the crossing remains that is.

This crossing will eventually get 8tph - 2tph Oxford - Marylebone (and vice versa) plus the 4tph on EWR. So closed for 20-25 minutes in an hour probably. Just to add, the current crossing is train man operated which necessarily takes longer now than it will when automated.

It seems to me that the closure of the crossing to road traffic might be reduced half the time you suggest by effective timetabling of passenger trains so that that they pass on or in the close vicinity of the level crossing.

 

[The Planner]

Pivoting a timetable around a level crossing is far from the best use of capacity and is very unlikely to happen. That area will be driven by what happens at Bicester Town/Gavray Jn and Bicester South Jn.

 

[al green]

I attended a briefing on EWRL by Network Rail today. I raised the issue of level crossings. They have a team looking at them. I asked when we would get some proposals for the key crossings. They didn't know but said they will get back to me with some timescales.

 

[route:oxford]

I attended a briefing on EWRL by Network Rail today. I raised the issue of level crossings. They have a team looking at them. I asked when we would get some proposals for the key crossings. They didn't know but said they will get back to me with some timescales.

What is the issue though?

Most local authorities are keen to slow traffic.

 

[cjp]

Pivoting a timetable around a level crossing is far from the best use of capacity and is very unlikely to happen. That area will be driven by what happens at Bicester Town/Gavray Jn and Bicester South Jn.

At least it is good to know it could be done if the will was there - which I guess it will not be (unless it suits some other Chiltern purpose) although there is the freight traffic as well as passenger traffic.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

What is the issue though?

Most local authorities are keen to slow traffic.

Slow traffic - yes
delay traffic - no

 

[67018]

What is the issue though?

Most local authorities are keen to slow traffic.

...not when slowing traffic on the out of town through route gives it a strong incentive to go through the middle of town instead!

On the subject of traffic, all the various developments planned for the Bicester Town area - big expansion to Bicester Village, loads of new houses, a 'mixed use station quarter' show just how important the improved rail links will be if traffic congestion is to be controlled. Should be a nice little earner for Chiltern too.

 

[route:oxford]

...not when slowing traffic on the out of town through route gives it a strong incentive to go through the middle of town instead!

I always do anyway, it's still quicker than the diversionary route.

On the subject of traffic, all the various developments planned for the Bicester Town area - big expansion to Bicester Village, loads of new houses, a 'mixed use station quarter' show just how important the improved rail links will be if traffic congestion is to be controlled. Should be a nice little earner for Chiltern too.

It must be a nice little earner at the moment...

165 toddling along at low speeds on a fairly flat route. On the odd weekend when I visit Bicester Village the services are very well loaded.

 

[67018]

I always do anyway, it's still quicker than the diversionary route.

Yes, trouble is the diversionary route doesn't even avoid the Bicester Village traffic. Hence one of the reasons they want to build a road through Graven Hill.

It must be a nice little earner at the moment...

It is well used, in fact I'm surprised it isn't busier given the low fares that undercut the bus service. (A rare case of parallel bus and rail services where the bus is the dearer, more comfortable and arguably quicker option).

Then there are the hordes that come via Bicester North as well. A big generator of off-peak traffic, mostly paying the full walk-on fare - must be every TOC's dream.

Incidentally, the work on the new chord seems to be ramping up properly now - much evidence of earth moving and what looks like laying of foundations this week.

 

[nanagrampy]

There have been suggestions in the past for a Charbridge Lane overbridge but nothing more has been said.

The current route could be a big earner but the fares haven't been adjusted. Lots of Bicester Village visitors arrive at Bicester North and then take a shuttle bus to the village. After the new link, they can take a train direct to the village.

Routexford, try going Vendee Drive (around the new housing estate called Kingsmere), under the railway bridge and then back to the A4421. I think you'll find it quicker than going through the centre of town - Google Maps now recognises it as a faster route.

 

[67018]

I forgot about the shuttle bus, and in particular the fares it charges. £4.50 for a day return: that's more than either the bus or train fare to Oxford! It might cost Chiltern money when people can go direct by train to Bicester Village, unless they can find a way to get the tourists to pay more.

 

[Andyjs247]

I forgot about the shuttle bus, and in particular the fares it charges. £4.50 for a day return: that's more than either the bus or train fare to Oxford! It might cost Chiltern money when people can go direct by train to Bicester Village, unless they can find a way to get the tourists to pay more.

Same price as a day return on the X5 to Oxford then. Chiltern don't operate the shuttle bus though; I believe it is run by Grayline. I don't think the shuttle buses will become redundant.

At the moment the Bicester North - Bicester Village shuttle is very much London focused. Post Evergreen 3 they could perhaps provide a link with trains from Birmingham/Warwick/Leamington/Banbury etc. given that London customers will be able to go direct. In time I hope that some sort of shuttle bus can run Bicester North - town centre - Bicester Town - Bicester Village at a sensible price. This would provide a link between the stations, town and the Village and extend to the Park&Ride that is planned by the A41/Vendee Drive.

It should go a long way to reducing congestion and could be useful say if you've parked at Bicester Town, gone to London and come back to find the next train goes back to Bicester North. Or just for getting from one end of Bicester Village to the other for that matter - it'll be quite a walk once extended.

 

[swt_passenger]

...In time I hope that some sort of shuttle bus can run Bicester North - town centre - Bicester Town - Bicester Village at a sensible price. This would provide a link between the stations, town and the Village and extend to the Park&Ride that is planned by the A41/Vendee Drive.

It should go a long way to reducing congestion and could be useful say if you've parked at Bicester Town, gone to London and come back to find the next train goes back to Bicester North. Or just for getting from one end of Bicester Village to the other for that matter - it'll be quite a walk once extended.

Not thinking big enough surely. If this was in London people would be posting suggesting an underground travelator at the very least. Or maybe a monorail or maglev?

 

[MK Tom]

Any rejigging of that bus would be a good idea. I pretty much see nobody using it whenever I go through Bicester. People will just use the S5 instead.

 

[nanagrampy]

The shuttle buses are mainly used by people going London-bound I think. There are lots more tourists in London than Birmingham so a reduced service would have to be ran if it were to continue, in my opinion.

I think it would be a great idea to stop in Bicester town centre but would Bicester Village agree? I suspect not, this gives tourists an opportunity to explore outside their money-making village. Linking it up with the park and ride though could make the town centre compromise worthwhile.

Going between stations, the bus would have to be free I think for people to do this. It would be a good idea, otherwise the station situation in Bicester will become rather confusing.

The shuttle bus service is well-used but only one way. In the morning everybody is going from the station to Bicester Village, the buses are full, but with nobody going the other direction. It is then the opposite in the late afternoon and evening. Providing extra destinations will provide more income going the other direction and perhaps could continue to the Bicester Eco-town?

 

[edwin_m]

Not thinking big enough surely. If this was in London people would be posting suggesting an underground travelator at the very least. Or maybe a monorail or maglev?

Nah, not ambitous enough. HS2 should be re-routed via Bicester with a station and nine trains per hour to serve the demand for Bicester Village.

(Joke. HS2 critics need not rise to the bait. )