Oxford Station Redevelopment Announced

[Andyjs247]

Plans for a £75m redevelopment of Oxford Station are being unveiled today. Oxford City Council has released details of the scheme and a public exhibition on the proposals for redeveloped station and transport interchange and will take place on 1-2 August in Oxford at the Westgate Centre Exhibition Suite. See
Oxford Mail article.

...Areas have been earmarked for new flats and apartments while shops, office space and a hotel could be included in the final project.

A transport terminal will be built across from the station between Botley Road and Becket Street – where the long-stay car-park is currently.

It will include a new bus station, multi-storey car-park and cycle racks.

The station will be bulldozed to make way for a new one which will run parallel to Botley Road, where the station’s current cycle racks are, and face on to Frideswide Square. Part of Botley Road will be lowered for the new bridge.

Land to the north of the new station, which will stretch from where the current short-stay car-park is, could be used for office space, a hotel or an expansion of the Said Business School, including student accommodation.

There will be a smaller area of commercial development opposite the station on the corner of Botley Road and Becket Street...

Plans show 2 new island platforms (so 4 through platforms) with 2 through lines between and (it appears) 2 north facing bays. The new station building would be 80% bigger than previous with more shops. There would be a transport interchange with bus station, multi-storey car park, and cycle racks. Work on the development could start in 2017 with completion by 2019.

 

[LexyBoy]

Moving the bus station there wouldn't be popular, unless all services also call in the centre. Obviously the potential to sell off that land would be extremely attractive though. Making it a hub for local services would be great though, at the moment there's often a walk into town required (unless you're going Cowley or Iffley way) making the bus unattractive for visitors (or to get to the station).

Extra through platforms are long overdue - although the current station copes remarkably well with two, it's common to have minor delays whilst waiting for a platform and especially XC seem to often pick up a few more minutes delay.

Most importantly, will the owl have somewhere to perch?!?

 

[Ironside]

Will that be enough platforms? and with all the other new buildings being packed around the station will that prevent any further platform developments?

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Link to the actual plans at http://www.oxford.gov.uk/PageRender/decN/newsarticle.htm?newsarticle_itemid=54987 - that page has a link near the bottom of the page to a pdf of the station masterplan map.

The pdf appears to show 4 through platforms but I only see one north-facing bay platform on it - for a total of 5 platforms.

 

[jimm]

Moving the bus station there wouldn't be popular, unless all services also call in the centre. Obviously the potential to sell off that land would be extremely attractive though. Making it a hub for local services would be great though, at the moment there's often a walk into town required (unless you're going Cowley or Iffley way) making the bus unattractive for visitors (or to get to the station).

Extra through platforms are long overdue - although the current station copes remarkably well with two, it's common to have minor delays whilst waiting for a platform and especially XC seem to often pick up a few more minutes delay.

Most importantly, will the owl have somewhere to perch?!?

The point of putting the bus station there is precisely to bring more bus routes to the station, providing better links to the rest of the city and a walk-on bus service to and from the centre - though plenty of people walk it anyway. And it's not as if Gloucester Green is that great as a bus station, with a cramped site and poor access, which is why so many of the bus routes steer well clear of it.

Back in the 1940s the GWR and LMS drew up a plan for a new station with, I think, eight through platforms, and a bus station on the Rewley Road station site now occupied by the Said Business School. This concept certainly formed part of the city council's planning strategy for a long time afterwards but they never made it a reality and then Railtrack - the property company with a national railway network attached - arrived and flogged off Rewley Road (and sold land the other side of the station for the Youth Hostel - also to be demolished as part of this scheme).

i'm not sure I'd describe current delays as minor. If a Cotswold Line HST gets pulled up outside the station, waiting for platform 2 to clear, it typically takes two minutes from the preceding train moving off into the sidings or to Banbury before the HST is at a stand in the platform, then allow for the time stood at the signal and throw in slam door closing time and you can pick up a five-minute delay, no trouble at all.

Will that be enough platforms? and with all the other new buildings being packed around the station will that prevent any further platform developments?

Should be plenty. There are freight through lines as well.

Link to the actual plans at http://www.oxford.gov.uk/PageRender/decN/newsarticle.htm?newsarticle_itemid=54987 - that page has a link near the bottom of the page to a pdf of the station masterplan map.

The pdf appears to show 4 through platforms but I only see one north-facing bay platform on it - for a total of 5 platforms.

I wouldn't take that plan as gospel in terms of the final railway track layout and number of bays. It is only intended to give an overall picture of the station scheme and up until now Chiltern have always been keen on having two bays, to allow a degree of flexibility.

With the ever-expanding role that the East West scheme now seems to be getting, we're still a way off from a final track plan for the Oxford area and wider enhancements from Didcot to Oxford and a new Oxford North junction - and also on to Wolvercot junction, where there is potential to continue the down loop (currently being reinstated most of the way) right up to the junction and allow parallel running north from Oxford for trains going to Banbury and Worcester. Oh and the Prime Minister telling the Chancellor and Transport Secretary that money should be found for redoubling Wolvercot to Charlbury (his station of choice on constituency visits).

This shows the old layout at Wolvercot http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2196/2040147867_72c09ad4c5.jpg

 

[The Planner]

Interesting, so unless they have found a load of cash in the last few weeks the up through track is still an aspiration and certainly isn't in the latest resignalling plans. It is still two bays on the up side at the north of the station.

 

[cle]

In terms of increases in services by 2019 there could be additionally:

1tph E/W to Bedford
1tph E/W to Milton Keynes
1tph E/W to Long distance place
2tph E/W to Marylebone (bay)

plus
2-3tph correspondingly to Reading/Didcot-onwards from E/W, assuming some do not originate in Oxford.

plus
any increases along the GWML due to electrification, and any improvements to the Cotswolds line too (but likely to be extensions of existing trains).
Murmurs of North Downs or WRaTH services also - and maybe the odd Crossrail peak extension!

So a fair bit of growth planned, but 4 through platforms would be a great improvement on today.

 

[gordonthemoron]

isn't Gloucester Green a coach station rather than a bus station?

 

[LexyBoy]

isn't Gloucester Green a coach station rather than a bus station?

Primarily yes, though some of the longer distance bus routes terminate there (the 66, maybe S2/3?). Now I think about it, even if coaches started from the railway station I think they would all come through town anyway to pick up, so not such a loss - though boarding the coach at your leisure is nicer than waiting in the rain at the side of the road.

The point of putting the bus station there is precisely to bring more bus routes to the station, providing better links to the rest of the city and a walk-on bus service to and from the centre - though plenty of people walk it anyway. And it's not as if Gloucester Green is that great as a bus station, with a cramped site and poor access, which is why so many of the bus routes steer well clear of it.

How much is the currrent service level down to lack of space at the station rather than access to it? I can't think of a decent route from North Oxford to the station, and even from the East it's a fairly tortuous route round to Castle St.

i'm not sure I'd describe current delays as minor. If a Cotswold Line HST gets pulled up outside the station, waiting for platform 2 to clear, it typically takes two minutes from the preceding train moving off into the sidings or to Banbury before the HST is at a stand in the platform, then allow for the time stood at the signal and throw in slam door closing time and you can pick up a five-minute delay, no trouble at all.

Fair point. I'm not a regular user any more - my point was that the two platform layout doesn't cause massive snarl-ups often (though I've seen it!), but does add minutes to many services.

 

[davetheguard]

isn't Gloucester Green a coach station rather than a bus station?

Yes, in the main. Both London coach operators use it, but a handful of local buses too. I believe they have to pay a fee to the City Council (who own it) for every timetabled visit.

In reality, there is no longer room at the site for lots of local bus routes anyway; most of the formerly far larger site was flogged off and redeveloped in, I believe, the late 70's?. Since then, we've not only had a vast increase in the amount of buses in Oxford, but some pedestrianisation of streets too. So we've ended up with the far from ideal present situation, with most bus routes leaving from stops in various different streets instead: Magdalen Street to go north; St. Aldate's to go south; High Street to go east; George St. to go west etc. (with exceptions too, of course!)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Over at the railway station, one of the problems with the existing Oxford track layout is that it is not operationally very flexible; platform one (the up platform) is the only one signalled for up trains. You can't start an up train from platform two (the down platform); and the only other platform is a north facing bay, which obviously rules out access to Paddington (although it'll be fine for Marylebone come 2016!).

So if something fails in platform one, you've basically had it. As in so many places, a layout suitable for the amount of passenger trains running in the mid 60's, struggles to cope with what's running today.

 

[MarkyT]

The pdf appears to show 4 through platforms but I only see one north-facing bay platform on it - for a total of 5 platforms.

There looks to be room between the platform itself and the adjacent buildings E1-3 for another terminating track from the north. The single north facing bay track currently shown might also be extended under the station concourse to form another through platform if the building and its supporting columns were built for it. In addition there could be room south of the Botley Road bridge, alongside the bus station on the up side for a south facing bay for terminating slow trains from the Reading direction.

 

[The Planner]

Its just an artists impression, 4 and a bay is the best you'll ever get and im still not convinced you will get 4. The south bay got tried a few years back and got canned.

 

[jimm]

There looks to be room between the platform itself and the adjacent buildings E1-3 for another terminating track from the north. The single north facing bay track currently shown might also be extended under the station concourse to form another through platform if the building and its supporting columns were built for it. In addition there could be room south of the Botley Road bridge, alongside the bus station on the up side for a south facing bay for terminating slow trains from the Reading direction.

The south bay is dead and buried. It was never an ideal solution, as it would still have involved trains from the Didcot direction crossing the throat to reach it and blocking the up line during that move.

The proposed layout will allow trains to turn round in a platform at the station, without the shunt moves to and from the carriage sidings.

There is a video animation now online here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAXwIxMSwBI&feature=youtu.be

If you freeze it at five seconds in, you can see the fourth through platform road, and that there is a single bay platform shown. Also gives a diveunder trip through a new wider Botley Road under the tracks and a walkthrough of the conceptual station.

 

[mr_jrt]

There looks to be room between the platform itself and the adjacent buildings E1-3 for another terminating track from the north. The single north facing bay track currently shown might also be extended under the station concourse to form another through platform if the building and its supporting columns were built for it. In addition there could be room south of the Botley Road bridge, alongside the bus station on the up side for a south facing bay for terminating slow trains from the Reading direction.

I agree - a 5th through platform would be much better than the one bay, but I really don't think it's on the cards

I do wonder if they'll regret not providing more platforms in this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity...what they're proposing seems to be what's needed now, let alone what will be needed if growth continues. :/

 

[The Planner]

Dont use it as a terminating station and you dont need all the platforms being talked about. It doesnt need to be a dumping ground for trains. Just how many trains are people expecting to need 5 through platforms, especially if you are talking 2 minute dwells at best and 3 minute reoccupations.

 

[mr_jrt]

Dont use it as a terminating station and you dont need all the platforms being talked about. It doesnt need to be a dumping ground for trains. Just how many trains are people expecting to need 5 through platforms, especially if you are talking 2 minute dwells at best and 3 minute reoccupations.

Well, I'm projecting that if growth continues that they may need to consider 4-tracking up from Didcot to separate local and express services, and perhaps, just perhaps, a rebuilt route from the south via Thame (not a reopening - a proper modern rebuilt one with double track). In which case, you'd want 3 island platforms - one for the east-side lines via the branches to Thame and Bicester, one for the up lines, and one for the down lines - i.e. 6-tracking through Oxford station between the junctions.

 

[The Planner]

Massive overkill. Didcot to Oxford gets resignalled bringing the headways down anyway. 4 tracking will more than likely only ever be Radley to Wolvercote and a new line from Thame is fantasy land and will never happen. The best that will ever happen there is to the science park and I am far from convinced by that one. Chiltern looked at Thame years ago and soon baulked at the price.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I've rather lost track of the timescales, but wouldn't the resignalling allow reversals back to Paddington in P2, before the rebuild happens?
Although I can imagine the grumbling from Oxonians after a "platform alteration" requires a sudden trek over the bridge...

 

[MarkyT]

With the centre through lines remaining at Oxford one way of providing extra capacity for shorter trains could be to install "Dutch style" scissors crossovers part way along the inner through platforms. At first I wrote "Cambridge style" but we can't have that sort of thing in Oxford!

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

With the centre through lines remaining at Oxford one way of providing extra capacity for shorter trains could be to install "Dutch style" scissors crossovers part way along the inner through platforms. At first I wrote "Cambridge style" but we can't have that sort of thing in Oxford!

"Chester-style" then...
Although even at Chester only one mid-platform crossover exists now.

 

[MarkyT]

"Chester-style" then...
Although even at Chester only one mid-platform crossover exists now.

Or "Gloucester-style" with a similar single crossover rather than scissors.

 

[The Planner]

Not in the plans either I'm afraid!

 

[Tio Terry]

Don't forget the additional Freight services that will use the through roads. Last I heard the Southampton - West Midlands Electric Spine wanted an additional 19 paths each way a day.

 

[jimm]

I agree - a 5th through platform would be much better than the one bay, but I really don't think it's on the cards

I do wonder if they'll regret not providing more platforms in this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity...what they're proposing seems to be what's needed now, let alone what will be needed if growth continues. :/

Think you'll find that Chiltern Railways, likely to be the main user of the bay platform, think it is a great idea.

In addition to the Planner's point about platform occupation time, Oxford already has provision, using call-on signals, for two trains to be in the existing platforms 1 and 2 at the same time. so I would expect similar provision in future and the through platforms will be able to accommodate two five-car trains with room to spare. Throw in bi-directional signalling as well and there will be plenty of capacity.

 

[MarkyT]

Think you'll find that Chiltern Railways, likely to be the main user of the bay platform, think it is a great idea.

In addition to the Planner's point about platform occupation time, Oxford already has provision, using call-on signals, for two trains to be in the existing platforms 1 and 2 at the same time. so I would expect similar provision in future and the through platforms will be able to accommodate two five-car trains with room to spare. Throw in bi-directional signalling as well and there will be plenty of capacity.

Although allowed traditionally, permissive working for platform sharing by passenger trains that don't subsequently join were frowned on by safety authorities following a number of accidents. Although signalling can't specifically disallow the movements they must not be planned to take place in the normal course of events, although they are allowed infrequently to get out of an operational problem. Rules for modern signalling normally prevent the clearance of a signal for the forward train to depart before the rear one has arrived and come to a complete stand and the converse applies too, preventing clearance of the call-on if the departure signal has already cleared. Before entering an occupied platform from a station home a train is slowed to a near stop before the position light call on signal can clear. It can be seen that using these permissive facilities can be difficult and time consuming.

Nevertheless there are cases where the ends of a continuous long platform are used regularly by multiple trains without there being any expensive mid-platform signals. Bristol Temple Meads is a long established example of this where each platform is divided by a two-sided St Andrews Cross marker board attached to the canopies, each platform end being separately numbered. The identity of the target platform is reflected in the route indication displayed at the home signal for an approaching train movement: The far platform number displayed with a main aspect means go past the marker board to the next signal at the far end of the combined platform; a position light with the near end number means proceed cautiously no further than the marker board. Any subsequent movement passing the marker board, to attach or draw forward, must be authorised verbally by the signaller.

It looks like platforms at the redeveloped Reading are equipped with a similar system to Bristol, with marker boards part way along the platforms, so perhaps the same arrangement could be applied at Oxford. That could allow (say) a terminating short stopping train from Reading to be followed into the same platfrom by a Worcester train whilst an XC express is departing from the parallel platform towards Birmingham. Once the express is clear, the empty stopper could go straight into the down side sidings to reverse, and would be out of the way quickly to allow the Worcester train to depart. There could be a mirror image of this pattern in the up direction.

 

[The Planner]

Would be an odd way of doing it as that assumes the XC has been there a while. You would dump the stopper on the loop platform and the XC and FGW follow each other through the other. Whilst that happens the stopper dumps out and gets ready to go ECS to the sidings as soon as the FGW goes.

 

[MarkyT]

Would be an odd way of doing it as that assumes the XC has been there a while. You would dump the stopper on the loop platform and the XC and FGW follow each other through the other. Whilst that happens the stopper dumps out and gets ready to go ECS to the sidings as soon as the FGW goes.

OK lets say the stopper got there first with the the XC catching it up immediately behind and being routed into the adjacent platform. The Worcester, following very close behind the XC, wouldn't have to wait until it had completely cleared its platform if it could pull into the other platform behind the stopper, which would be able to get out of the Worcester's way into the sidings before time to depart, especially if it's a bi-mode IEP perhaps and a little extra contingency time has been added into it's Oxford stop for changing over from electric to diesel power.

 

[HowardGWR]

Dear old Temple Meads was mentioned earlier. AIUI, there used to be a genuine split in the long platforms (9 and 10 and 6 and 7 in those days?) so that one train could use the middle roads to overtake the one in front of it. Can't they do that at Oxford (at least on the two middle platforms)?

 

[MarkyT]

Dear old Temple Meads was mentioned earlier. AIUI, there used to be a genuine split in the long platforms (9 and 10 and 6 and 7 in those days?) so that one train could use the middle roads to overtake the one in front of it. Can't they do that at Oxford (at least on the two middle platforms)?

I suggested the *highly inappropriate* Cambridge solution further up the thread and that of course would have the additional expense of the extra pointwork.

As long as the middle lines are retained, such crossovers could be introduced in the future at Oxford if demand warranted it. A similar arrangement with just one middle through road could be reintroduced at Bristol under the main train shed if necessary.

Perhaps just a little 'passive consideration' if not actual provision could be taken in the remodelling and resignalling projects taking place at both Oxford and Bristol so as not to make the future provision of the additional crossovers unreasonably difficult. Future layout changes will in any case be much easier to manage once modern computer-based signalling is in use rather than the current hard-wired relay system.

 

[Tio Terry]

Well, I'm projecting that if growth continues that they may need to consider 4-tracking up from Didcot to separate local and express services, and perhaps, just perhaps, a rebuilt route from the south via Thame (not a reopening - a proper modern rebuilt one with double track). In which case, you'd want 3 island platforms - one for the east-side lines via the branches to Thame and Bicester, one for the up lines, and one for the down lines - i.e. 6-tracking through Oxford station between the junctions.

The current proposals do not include 4 tracking Didcot to Oxford. At Oxford the proposal is for a double bay platform arrangement for the Evergreen (Milton Keynes) services and a new platform on the Down at the rear of the current Down platform. This will mean TWA powers to "modify" (maybe demolish) the YMCA hostel (built on land owned by Railtrack some time ago but sold) and a Children's Nursery (which used to be the Drivers signing on point but was sold by Railtrack).

Oxford Council has grandiose plans for considerably more but no money to back it up. Unless they can persuade the government to stump up more, or find it themselves, their plans are no more than pie in the sky.

Also, the current electrification plans stop at Oxford - although everyone expects it to be extended North - it's just nobody knows who's going to pay for it!