New Oxford Station to be approved?

[jimm]

The above image appears to be an Ordnance Survey map showing the location of Oxford Road Halt (Water Eaton). This image is from the Disused Stations website http://www.disused-stations.org.uk/o/oxford_road_halt/

It was the dismantled connection (circa 1913?) around Peartree Hill that I was trying to initially explain in the previous post.

Has the whole of the formation as shown by the horizontal black line in the first and second images been obliterated today with the realignment of the A34?

Also, is Oxford North Junction (not shown in any of the images above) is where the Bletchley route diverges north of the station? If so, I can see how that would be a better location for grade separation now, and perhaps the track along the Oxford, Worcester, & Wolverhampton could be redoubled between Hanborough and Charlbury with this tied in with the proper formal closure of Finstock and Combe.

PS I could not find the initial schematic diagram the other day (I remember coming across it when posted in the "Lines that were never built" thread) as my browser froze, and I had cleared the cache. The three images above were the best I could find.

In addition to the presence of the A34 and the interchange, what isn't obvious from the satellite image on Google maps unless you zoom in is that the entire embankment east of the former Yarnton Junction, past the Banbury line as far as the farm buildings, was removed by whoever bought the land from BR after closure.

 

[FGW_DID]

Where the line crossed the Woodstock Road, the crossing keepers cottage is still in use as a private residence. It's named something like Railway Cottage Wolvercote and has a GWR style locomotive nameplate on the fence.

Very overgrown, you may not see it from a passing car (right next to the roundabout) but you can just about make it out on 'street view'

For some reason it's not allowing me to upload the screen shots I've taken:roll:

 

[gallafent]

There's some public stirring going on, now that the consultation is over:

http://www.oxfordtimes.co.uk/news/1..._hub_should_be_built_at_Oxpens/?ref=mrb&lp=17

“A MASTERPLAN for Oxford Station is ‘out of date’ and a new transport hub should be built in Oxpens, it has been claimed.

“Oxford City Council’s consultation on the proposed £125m station redevelopment finished last month and officers are currently reviewing a vast number of responses before considering changes.

“Oxford Civic Society said proposed railway upgrades had rendered the council’s plan ‘out of date’ and that cycling and pedestrian access had been left out altogether.”

… and so on. The fact that they mention Chiltern Evergreen 3 in the footnote is bizarre, given that it opened last December, and as far as I'm aware there are no plans to increase the current service frequency. Other rail upgrades mentioned would comfortably be handled by the proposed plan, as far as one can crystal-ball-gaze.

Having skimmed over the plans, I would say that cycling and pedestrian access have been considered quite well, in particular by opening proper access from the west. The provision of cycle and pedestrian access from further afield into the immediate station area feels out of scope to me, for this particular consultation, though it would of course be a useful aspect to consider separately! There are some other problems though.

“The group’s head of transport, Andrew Pritchard, said: “We agree with the visions and objective and support the aim of a single transport hub but it has a number of serious defects.

«“Although it mentions highly significant planned developments at the Westgate, Oxpens and Osney Mead – it doesn’t attempt to relate to them or achieve any synergy with them.”»

… and so on.

Osney Mead is to the west of the station, and the proposed western access provides much better connections to it, so I'm not sure I understand that aspect. Moving the station south would (with appropriate new access points to get to the river bridges, and better access from the river into Osney Mead itself) give good access too, of course.

I do recall seeing, some time ago, drawings in which the station extended over the (rebuilt) road bridge, to the south side of Botley Road, with access both there and in the current location, and I think it's a pity the entrances to the south of Botley Road appear to have been dropped in the latest plans. Likewise the consequent absence of a direct link between the bus stands and railway platforms (that link would also be south of Botley Road) is a pity. As for the fact that much of what should certainly be considered part of “Oxford City” to the west of the centre is in a different district (Vale of White Horse), and how that relates to the possibility of a unified authority, contradictory local plans, and so on, is definitely out of scope for this thread!

Still, consultation now closed, and it'll be interesting to see what transpires.

OCS's response attached for reference.

 

[jimm]

There's some public stirring going on, now that the consultation is over:

http://www.oxfordtimes.co.uk/news/1..._hub_should_be_built_at_Oxpens/?ref=mrb&lp=17

“A MASTERPLAN for Oxford Station is ‘out of date’ and a new transport hub should be built in Oxpens, it has been claimed.

“Oxford City Council’s consultation on the proposed £125m station redevelopment finished last month and officers are currently reviewing a vast number of responses before considering changes.

“Oxford Civic Society said proposed railway upgrades had rendered the council’s plan ‘out of date’ and that cycling and pedestrian access had been left out altogether.”

… and so on. The fact that they mention Chiltern Evergreen 3 in the footnote is bizarre, given that it opened last December, and as far as I'm aware there are no plans to increase the current service frequency. Other rail upgrades mentioned would comfortably be handled by the proposed plan, as far as one can crystal-ball-gaze.

Having skimmed over the plans, I would say that cycling and pedestrian access have been considered quite well, in particular by opening proper access from the west. The provision of cycle and pedestrian access from further afield into the immediate station area feels out of scope to me, for this particular consultation, though it would of course be a useful aspect to consider separately! There are some other problems though.

“The group’s head of transport, Andrew Pritchard, said: “We agree with the visions and objective and support the aim of a single transport hub but it has a number of serious defects.

«“Although it mentions highly significant planned developments at the Westgate, Oxpens and Osney Mead – it doesn’t attempt to relate to them or achieve any synergy with them.”»

… and so on.

Osney Mead is to the west of the station, and the proposed western access provides much better connections to it, so I'm not sure I understand that aspect. Moving the station south would (with appropriate new access points to get to the river bridges, and better access from the river into Osney Mead itself) give good access too, of course.

I do recall seeing, some time ago, drawings in which the station extended over the (rebuilt) road bridge, to the south side of Botley Road, with access both there and in the current location, and I think it's a pity the entrances to the south of Botley Road appear to have been dropped in the latest plans. Likewise the consequent absence of a direct link between the bus stands and railway platforms (that link would also be south of Botley Road) is a pity. As for the fact that much of what should certainly be considered part of “Oxford City” to the west of the centre is in a different district (Vale of White Horse), and how that relates to the possibility of a unified authority, contradictory local plans, and so on, is definitely out of scope for this thread!

Still, consultation now closed, and it'll be interesting to see what transpires.

OCS's response attached for reference.

The Civic Society has been obsessed with the idea of the station moving to Oxpens for years and never misses an opportunity to go on about it - no one else seems to think it is a good idea.

I think the county council had a brief flirtation at one point but Network Rail pointed out assorted issues at Oxpens, such as the need to spend a packet on track realignment, before you even got to the cost of the station itself.

Considering how far people have to walk to get to the bus bays or the stations in the terminals at Heathrow, for example, I'm sure they will somehow cope with crossing Botley Road to catch a bus... if you want to catch any of the routes that run down Botley Road into the city centre and beyond, you have to walk down to Frideswide Square anyway.

Re access south of Botley Road, you are confusing the current project for a complete station rebuild with the previous idea of just adding a bay platform for London services south of the road bridge - that would have had an entrance next to the car park and been linked over Botley Road to the existing platform 3 (formerly 1).

The Vale of White Horse council area does not start until Botley - a mile west of Oxford station - so I don't understand your reference to it.

 

[swt_passenger]

I always thought the various Oxpens proposals gave very little thought to the quaint concept of services actually running north of Oxford...

 

[route:oxford]

The Vale of White Horse council area does not start until Botley - a mile west of Oxford station - so I don't understand your reference to it.

The border VotWH border is a bit more complex than that though. It runs the length of the Railway through HInksey then wiggles about following various streams then is East of Seacourt.

It's why there were so many parties involved in the Hinksey Bridge protests. The ramp on the East side is in City Council territory, The West side is in VotWH, throw the County Council in for a laugh, then mix in Network Rail.

 

[MarkyT]

As far as I can see the master plan report includes a level, grade separated pedestrian bridge over Botley Road between the rail and bus stations at approximately the same level as the tracks and platforms and immediately to the east of the reconstructed rail bridges. It appears to be covered as well and as far as I know there's no particular difficulty in providing it as clearly the road will be sufficiently far Beneath the rail level and a pedestrian bridge deck should be thinner for a given span than a much more heavily loaded rail bridge. I don't know where people are getting the idea that such a link has been dropped. I see no evidence of that. The main concourse buildings and entrances to the station are at the far south of the platforms so are not a great distance from the bus terminal via the bridge route.

 

[jimm]

The border VotWH border is a bit more complex than that though. It runs the length of the Railway through HInksey then wiggles about following various streams then is East of Seacourt.

It's why there were so many parties involved in the Hinksey Bridge protests. The ramp on the East side is in City Council territory, The West side is in VotWH, throw the County Council in for a laugh, then mix in Network Rail.

But it is nowhere near the station or Oxpens, is it? Which is what we are talking about here.

 

[gallafent]

Re access south of Botley Road, you are confusing the current project for a complete station rebuild with the previous idea of just adding a bay platform for London services south of the road bridge - that would have had an entrance next to the car park and been linked over Botley Road to the existing platform 3 (formerly 1).

Yes, that's the fellow, thanks for remembering it more accurately than I could! Access from the bits of newly built stuff (including the bus area) “more directly” from the platforms, would seem to be an obvious improvement, to me, still.

The Vale of White Horse council area does not start until Botley - a mile west of Oxford station - so I don't understand your reference to it.

Was just to observe that this distance of a mile (in fact some of the more southerly bits of North Hinksey are well under a mile from the station, Oxford City has a /very/ odd shape and balance with respect to the city centre) is very short compared to the distances to the further reaches of the Oxford City authority (Probably the furthest from the station is Blackbird Leys at ~7km, …), but are substantially more affected by what happens there (not least because of impacts on road traffic and transit links directly west of the city). This is an Oxford City consultation, thought, with White Horse not directly involved, despite much of Oxford City's population being affected less than many in White Horse (for London traffic, which, though not dominant, must be amongst the largest users of the station, North Oxford people use Oxford Parkway these days, those living in Headington and the south east of the city mostly the excellent coach services down the M40, … for example). Would Oxfordshire County be a better level at which to pitch this sort of consultation? Maybe.

Really, then, it was just a grumble at the current heirarchical local authority structure not working well for joined-up infrastructure planning (amongst other things — witness the ongoing wrangling about which unitary reform to pursue, if any, for another example).

Unitary for county, plus unitary for Oxford, plus unitary for Banbury, feels like a good starting point for discussion, to me, but hasn't been seriously mentioned anywhere I've seen. Bedfordshire did this a while back (three unitaries, Central Bedfordshire / Bedford / Luton) and it seems to be working well. The population numbers, distances, etc., are not all that different. As for what should be in that “Oxford” unitary, drawing circles on a map centred on Carfax (for example (or perhaps the railway station ) is an interesting (and in my view useful!) exercise. Throwing in some intersections with ward boundaries and ward populations would guide that exercise further.

Anyway, now I've really diverged from the topic of this thread, so, with apologies for having diverged further than I should have from the subject of Oxford's potential new station, I'll stop!

 

[cle]

If the station was rebuilt on the same site - what do people thnk is the best layout in terms of platforms?

Could they just do five full-length through platforms, rather than bays? That way, freight could pass and the odd platform could be used as stabling - possibly with A and B ends for two shorter trains at each end? But still with that flexibility?

Or would it be more 3 through platforms and bays, type solution?

 

[jimm]

If the station was rebuilt on the same site - what do people thnk is the best layout in terms of platforms?

Could they just do five full-length through platforms, rather than bays? That way, freight could pass and the odd platform could be used as stabling - possibly with A and B ends for two shorter trains at each end? But still with that flexibility?

Or would it be more 3 through platforms and bays, type solution?

HowardGWR provided a link near the start of the thread to a gallery on the Oxford Mail website showing assorted artist's impressions and plans - the basic concept is two island platfoms with a north-end bay that could potentially be turned into a fifth through platform if wanted - e.g. if Chiltern services were to be extended out to Cowley on the freight branch.

I forgot the link to the plans.
http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/15...__masterplan__finally_revealed/?ref=mrb&lp=2#

 

[mr_jrt]

I worked out some time back that you could quite easily manage 6 through platforms and a couple of bays if you sacrificed the through lines and moved the eastern island platform slightly west over them. Unfortunately my server is down right now, but the PDF I put together showing it will eventually pop back up here: http://random.jamie-thompson.co.uk/Oxford 2.pdf

 

[route:oxford]

But it is nowhere near the station or Oxpens, is it? Which is what we are talking about here.

Of course it matters. You wildly exaggerated the distance by a factor of 4 by claiming that VotWH was a mile away in Botley.

In reality it's only 350-400 metres South of what would be the end of the platforms at Oxpens. And you can be sure they'll want to stick their oar in about the move being inconvenient for Botley residents.

 

[jimm]

Of course it matters. You wildly exaggerated the distance by a factor of 4 by claiming that VotWH was a mile away in Botley.

In reality it's only 350-400 metres South of what would be the end of the platforms at Oxpens. And you can be sure they'll want to stick their oar in about the move being inconvenient for Botley residents.

I was not wildly exaggerating anything. As you full well know it's a mile to Botley from the station.

As the crow flies from where the fictional Oxpens station might be to the closest point on the Hinksey Stream (ie the council boundary) looks the best part of half-a-mile to me.

Hinksey Stream is slap bang in the middle of the Thames flood plain, so no one lives there and no one is going to be building a road across there, so people on the roads would still be going via, er, Botley.

Never mind that there is not going to be a station at Oxpens anyway.