New rail link is capital idea

[whole diary]

[Btline]

You can have intermediate signals and 'flight' trains through the single track sections (ie more than one between direction changes).

Chiltern's Princes Risborough to Aylesbury line does this. (albeit with a lower train frequency)

[willc]

Would be interesting to know what the "structural problems" are

Weak embankments - something Chiltern know all about from the very expensive redoubling on the main line, especially north of Bicester, where the bill for the 10 miles or so to Aynho was something between ^50m and ^60m, mainly due to serious work being needed on the embankments to make them fit to support double track again.

[Btline]

Yes, we have BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)) to thank for it!

Just like we have BR to thank for the millions spent on the Evergreen 1 and 2 projects, bringing the Chiltern line back to its former glory.

[willc]

I think we actually have to thank BR^▸ (British Rail(ways))'s political masters - it wasn't as if BR had much choice about being given miserly budgets at a time when the kind of passenger numbers we see today would have seemed unthinkable.

[Btline]

I think we actually have to thank BR^▸ (British Rail(ways))'s political masters - it wasn't as if BR had much choice about being given miserly budgets at a time when the kind of passenger numbers we see today would have seemed unthinkable.

They could have saved money by mothballing, instead of ripping up track and slewing the other.

[Electric train]

I think we actually have to thank BR^▸ (British Rail(ways))'s political masters - it wasn't as if BR had much choice about being given miserly budgets at a time when the kind of passenger numbers we see today would have seemed unthinkable.

They could have saved money by mothballing, instead of ripping up track and slewing the other.

That would not have prevented damage to the embankments, also the track would not be up to much now especially any wooden sleepers.

[stebbo]

Still think re-opening Oxford/Thame/Princes Risborough could be looked at (as I suggested elsewhere on this site). Spending the dosh could be a serious alternative to quantitive easing...

[IndustryInsider]

Work has just started to add an extra modular deck to Bicester North's upper car park to further increase the number of spaces. It's a testament to Chiltern's success (and proactive approach) that this is being done only three years after the lower car park was opened which took the capacity up to nearly 600 spaces.

Looks like they'll be happy to accommodate peeved off FGW^▸ (First Great Western) customers for some time to come...

Haddenham & Thame Parkway's new extra deck of parking has now opened adding another 230 spaces or so to this busy commuter station - http://www.transportxtra.com/magazines/parking_review/news/?ID=22552

This adds to Chiltern's track record of providing additional parking at its busiest stations.  As well as Bicester North's twice extended car park, in recent years two additional decks have been added at Beaconsfield, as well as an extension to Warwick Parkway's initial spaces.  I can't think of any First Great Western stations within the commuter belt that have had extra parking added within the last 10 years - with the possible exception of Twyford which I think had a few spaces added about 5 years ago?

[willc]

Well if you count Kingham and Charlbury as commuter belt, they both gained substantially from work funded with the help of Oxfordshire County Council in recent years, with asphalt surfacing allowing spaces to be properly marked out, resulting in a decent increase in capacity, though not quite on a Bicester scale. Same applies at Radley more recently.

[Oxman]

I suspect there would be some planning issues around decking car parks in Oxford or the Cotswolds. Can't see a cheap and cheerful deck going down too well at Charlbury. It would be an excellent solution to the loss of parking at Oxford that would arise if the new platform is built on the long stay car park but, again, planning permission would be very difficult. Stone cladding and a dreaming spire would probably be required! Whatever was required, the cost would no doubt be considerably more than Chiltern pays for its car parks.

[paul7575]

Having been reminded about station carparks, I was interested to see posters announcing that site work on Southampton Parkway's new multi storey is about to start this month, with main construction starting in August.  They must think passenger numbers are about to pick up big time, as they are providing an extra 600 spaces over 5 storeys.  IIRC^▸ (if I recall/remember/read correctly) the plans were approved over a year ago, but work was deferred as numbers travelling eased off in the recession.

Paul

[IndustryInsider]

I suspect there would be some planning issues around decking car parks in Oxford or the Cotswolds. Can't see a cheap and cheerful deck going down too well at Charlbury. It would be an excellent solution to the loss of parking at Oxford that would arise if the new platform is built on the long stay car park but, again, planning permission would be very difficult.

Yes, I've said before about the fact that getting the OK for a similar scheme at Oxford might be problematical.  With the new south bay platform hoped to be complete by 2012, there could be an awkward period of time between the loss of a significant number of spaces caused by that scheme, and the expected lower demand for spaces when Water Eaton Parkway opens in 2013.  I've mentioned before about the largely vacant land that used to be the South Yard, so perhaps that could be used in the interim as an overflow car park?

I doubt anybody would want to stump up the extra cash for a second level of parking before it is known exactly what effect Water Eaton will have on the demand for spaces, and it's a pity the two schemes aren't planned to be complete the other way round so that could be assessed.  Mind you, dates for this sort of thing slip and slip and I'd have more confidence in Evergreen 3 being completed on time than this other scheme, so perhaps it'll all fit in quite nicely anyway!

[JayMac]

From The Oxford Times (22/07/2010):

Date set for inquiry into new rail link

The public inquiry into Chiltern Railway^s ^260m Oxford-Bicester-London rail link will start on November 2.

Operator Chiltern Railways wants to start running services from Oxford to London Marylebone, and build a new station at Water Eaton park-and-ride as part of the project. Part of the plans will see Bicester Town Station re-built and the journey from Bicester to Oxford reduced to just 14 minutes.

The inquiry will take place at the Oxford Conference Centre, Park End Street, Oxford.

Allan Dare, Chiltern^s strategic development manager, said: ^An inquiry is standard practice for projects like Evergreen 3, even though there has been overwhelming support for the scheme. Meanwhile, we are still talking to objectors to try to resolve any outstanding issues.^

Chiltern Railways is currently preparing a statement of case for the Bicester-to-Oxford improvement plans, which is due to be submitted by August 6.

A pre-inquiry meeting will take place on September 7, and anyone who wants to make representation at the inquiry can attend.

The inquiry is expected to last about six weeks.

Also, a reminder that Chiltern Railways have a website dedicated to the 'Evergreen 3' project. http://www.chiltern-evergreen3.co.uk/

[IndustryInsider]

Just a thought on the subject of Water Eaton Parkway, which I think everyone recognises will become quite a successful and important new station when it opens.  But, why call it Water Eaton Parkway (assuming that name is not just a working title)?  Water Eaton itself is loosely described at a Hamlet, but it hardly even justifies a title of that importance!  Wouldn't calling it Kidlington Parkway (or even North Oxford Parkway) give this new station much more of an identity?  After all, it's only half a mile away from Kidlington and its 14000 residents and only slightly further away from what you'd call North Oxford.

[willc]

Probably because that's what the existing park-and-ride centre adjacent to the station site is called, so trying to call a railway station there something else might prove confusing. Plus people in Kidlington would still quite like their own station on the Banbury line back.

And the park-and-ride/Parkway site isn't actually in either the city of Oxford, or the Kidlington parish, lying in Gosford and Water Eaton parish instead, so much scope for parochial squabbling were another name to be suggested.