Will parts of Oxford Phase 2 be ditched?

[Nicholas43]

The ambitions were set out HERE, including maps.
Local reports are that Phase 2A, level crossing closures at Yarnton etc, is postponed / abandoned, because lots of new freight paths are not currently being demanded.
Phase 2B, faster turnouts north of Oxford, is I think completed.
Phase 2C, replacement and enhancement of Botley Road rail bridge, is now admitted to be months (/years?) behind schedule, and widely assumed to be hugely over budget. A new span to serve the intended platform 5 is presumably still thought worthwhile. On the other hand, the significant road widening and wide pedestrian/cycle ways both sides might now be deemed, by the new government, unaffordable.
Phase 2D seems, on the ground, already to be de-scoped to 'add a new platform face (to be numbered 5) to the existing platform 4'. A new western entrance might be deemed, by the new government, to be unaffordable.
What do forum members think, or are able to reveal?

 

[Mgameing123]

Are we talking about East West Rail?

 

[SynthD]

Are we talking about East West Rail?

They all affect EWR, but are good ideas without EWR at the station.

How would 2C be descoped in a way that saves money? The span is going to be that wide, and the utilities are being moved with that in mind. A shorter span would need different foundations. 2D may wait for electrification, but the western entrance is important, especially for those who’ve been suffering the extended road closure.

 

[Mgameing123]

They all affect EWR, but are good ideas without EWR at the station.

How would 2C be descoped in a way that saves money? The span is going to be that wide, and the utilities are being moved with that in mind. A shorter span would need different foundations. 2D may wait for electrification, but the western entrance is important, especially for those who’ve been suffering the extended road closure.

What are you talking about?

 

[SynthD]

Read the pdf linked at the top of the first post. Page five has a map of the four phases.

 

[zwk500]

Phase 2C, replacement and enhancement of Botley Road rail bridge, is now admitted to be months (/years?) behind schedule, and widely assumed to be hugely over budget. A new span to serve the intended platform 5 is presumably still thought worthwhile. On the other hand, the significant road widening and wide pedestrian/cycle ways both sides might now be deemed, by the new government, unaffordable.

I can't see 2C being canned now, as a large portion of the work has been done and the bridges need to be finished to reopen Botley Road. Changing the design now would be even more expensive, and cancelling contracts at this stage likely also incurs penalties.

Phase 2D seems, on the ground, already to be de-scoped to 'add a new platform face (to be numbered 5) to the existing platform 4'. A new western entrance might be deemed, by the new government, to be unaffordable.
What do forum members think, or are able to reveal?

IMO, platform 5 is a no-brainer. The difficult bits have been done and it gives strong benefits. It could well be deferred but it will be done at some point I expect. The western entrance is probably tied into development on that side of Oxford so I'd be surprised if it wasn't pushed forward as well, although the government may require more external funding before authorising work.

The kicker for the project's overrun/delay is that it makes it less like the Didcot-Oxford electrification will be authorised any time soon after the rebuild is completed.

Are we talking about East West Rail?

Not directly - the bits directly for EWR are already complete, the last 2 phases of the work (C is underway and D the main object of the discussion) are on the west/northbound side of the station, whereas EWR will stay (at least initially) on the east/southbound side for the bay platforms.

 

[Nicholas43]

Thanks for comments above.
Moving all the pipes and cables, so that the road surface under the bridge can be lowered, is apparently nearly complete. Nothing (that I can see) has been done to prepare to build new abutments so that a new northside foot- and cycleway + the deepened carriageway + a new southside foot- and cycle way can be built. Network Rail have not claimed that they already have, offsite, waiting to helicoptered in (or whatever), a new 4-track span to serve platform 4, the two through tracks, and platform 3, plus a new single track span to connect to the new platform 5. On the face of it, given that the DfT is looking to cut costs, the project could be de-scoped, for example
(a) by providing a foot- and cycle-way only on one side of the lowered carriageway (so that the new spans can be shorter); and even
(b) by ditching the additional span to serve platform 5, and instead linking to the south end of the platform 5 track by a new turnout to the north of the bridge. This would imply shortening the usable length of platform 4, so I guess could be a false economy. And would also mean that the turnout optimistically started near the Osney Lane footbridge was visibly and embarrassingly abortive.
Meanwhile timings are published from December 2024 for driver-training services 2 tph Oxford platform 1 to Milton Keynes. So it looks as though Chiltern think they can run 4 tph into platforms 1 and 2. Trains Oxford to Bedford are, of course, a decade away; and trains Oxford to Cambridge via Bedford (notwithstanding the hype under the ridiculous brand name 'East West Rail') are decades away, if they happen at all.

 

[JamesT]

Thanks for comments above.
Moving all the pipes and cables, so that the road surface under the bridge can be lowered, is apparently nearly complete. Nothing (that I can see) has been done to prepare to build new abutments so that a new northside foot- and cycleway + the deepened carriageway + a new southside foot- and cycle way can be built. Network Rail have not claimed that they already have, offsite, waiting to helicoptered in (or whatever), a new 4-track span to serve platform 4, the two through tracks, and platform 3, plus a new single track span to connect to the new platform 5. On the face of it, given that the DfT is looking to cut costs, the project could be de-scoped, for example
(a) by providing a foot- and cycle-way only on one side of the lowered carriageway (so that the new spans can be shorter); and even
(b) by ditching the additional span to serve platform 5, and instead linking to the south end of the platform 5 track by a new turnout to the north of the bridge. This would imply shortening the usable length of platform 4, so I guess could be a false economy. And would also mean that the turnout optimistically started near the Osney Lane footbridge was visibly and embarrassingly abortive.
Meanwhile timings are published from December 2024 for driver-training services 2 tph Oxford platform 1 to Milton Keynes. So it looks as though Chiltern think they can run 4 tph into platforms 1 and 2. Trains Oxford to Bedford are, of course, a decade away; and trains Oxford to Cambridge via Bedford (notwithstanding the hype under the ridiculous brand name 'East West Rail') are decades away, if they happen at all.

How much cheaper would such a de-scoped scheme be? Isn’t varying an already designed improvement likely to delay things even more and costs even more through having to vary the signed contracts?

 

[zwk500]

Thanks for comments above.
Moving all the pipes and cables, so that the road surface under the bridge can be lowered, is apparently nearly complete. Nothing (that I can see) has been done to prepare to build new abutments so that a new northside foot- and cycleway + the deepened carriageway + a new southside foot- and cycle way can be built. Network Rail have not claimed that they already have, offsite, waiting to helicoptered in (or whatever), a new 4-track span to serve platform 4, the two through tracks, and platform 3, plus a new single track span to connect to the new platform 5. On the face of it, given that the DfT is looking to cut costs, the project could be de-scoped, for example
(a) by providing a foot- and cycle-way only on one side of the lowered carriageway (so that the new spans can be shorter); and even
(b) by ditching the additional span to serve platform 5, and instead linking to the south end of the platform 5 track by a new turnout to the north of the bridge. This would imply shortening the usable length of platform 4, so I guess could be a false economy. And would also mean that the turnout optimistically started near the Osney Lane footbridge was visibly and embarrassingly abortive.
Meanwhile timings are published from December 2024 for driver-training services 2 tph Oxford platform 1 to Milton Keynes. So it looks as though Chiltern think they can run 4 tph into platforms 1 and 2. Trains Oxford to Bedford are, of course, a decade away; and trains Oxford to Cambridge via Bedford (notwithstanding the hype under the ridiculous brand name 'East West Rail') are decades away, if they happen at all.

Changing any elements of the design now will incur cancellation or change costs to the contract - these can often exceed the costs of just doing it as planned. In particular, changing the track layout plans at this stage will only make the budget problem worse as Track & signalling engineers will need to recheck everything properly.
Also, remember that the bridges will have already been procured, because they should have been in place by now

I personally can't see any changes to the intended designs at this point. Deferring the new entrance and platform is possible but the space would be left for it as was planned.

 

[JamesT]

I personally can't see any changes to the intended designs at this point. Deferring the new entrance and platform is possible but the space would be left for it as was planned.

Platform 5 has been under construction for several months now. So stopping work on that would have similar cancellation costs. I suspect the new entrance has to be constructed as well to provide an emergency exit on that side of the station.

 

[Nicholas43]

The BBC reported, here, that Network Rail said its review is looking at "what has been achieved so far, what remains to be done, plus the timescales and budget required". The contract with Kier can't have said "build this and we'll pay you £161 million". Everyone knew there were huge uncertainties about how many pipes and cables went where, and (apparently) no-one knew that there was a thick inverted brick arch deep under the old road surface.

 

[Nicholas43]

Network Rail bosses have said they cannot reveal when the whole scheme will be completed, as a review of the project is now taking place.
A rail industry source has told the Oxford Mail that three main options are now being considered by Network Rail, the Department for Transport, the county council, and contractors Kier.

According to the rail industry insider these options are:

1: Complete the work, keeping the road closed at the rail bridge for as long as necessary.

2: Finish ‘vital work’ and then break to allow the county council to launch its traffic filters scheme and reopen Botley Road. This break could last for as long as six months as the filters trial is due to last six months.

3: Stop the work and postpone the scheme indefinitely. Reopen the road at the rail bridge. This last scenario was described as the least likely or 'nuclear' option.

It is understood the £161m scheme has gone over-budget.

according to a report in the Oxford Mail today, 29 August.

 

[Nicholas43]

... and a Network Rail press release dated 2 October 2024 confirmed that, after more digging by Thames Water and Kier,

discussions can continue with funders around potential options for the overall scheme.

Any such 'options', will, I surmise, include substantial descoping.

 

[Farigiraf]

Is any actual work planned to be done to facilitate passenger service over the Cowley branch, or was it nothing more than a proposal? It was a popular scheme in the EWR discussion but it hasn't seemed to go anywhere. Or is Cowley only going to be considered once Oxford-Bedford/Cambridge is completed?

 

[Nicholas43]

Is any actual work planned to be done to facilitate passenger service over the Cowley branch, or was it nothing more than a proposal? It was a popular scheme in the EWR discussion but it hasn't seemed to go anywhere. Or is Cowley only going to be considered once Oxford-Bedford/Cambridge is completed?

Dreams of passenger services over the stub of the THA line haven't yet got to a draft business case, and are discussed in other threads.

 

[JamesT]

Is any actual work planned to be done to facilitate passenger service over the Cowley branch, or was it nothing more than a proposal? It was a popular scheme in the EWR discussion but it hasn't seemed to go anywhere. Or is Cowley only going to be considered once Oxford-Bedford/Cambridge is completed?

https://www.oxford.gov.uk/building-projects/reopening-cowley-branch-line-passengers may be helpful in covering the Cowley Branch.

If funded, the line would be upgraded and two new stations would be built: “Oxford Littlemore” (for Littlemore and The Oxford Science Park) and “Oxford Cowley” (for Blackbird Leys and ARC Oxford). The planning assumption is for two trains per hour via Oxford Station through to London Marylebone Station.

EWR isn’t involved, it’s not clear whether it would depend on the current works at Oxford station.

 

[Farigiraf]

https://www.oxford.gov.uk/building-projects/reopening-cowley-branch-line-passengers may be helpful in covering the Cowley Branch.

Interesting, thanks

EWR isn’t involved, it’s not clear whether it would depend on the current works at Oxford station.

Oh, ok. I guess I got lost amongst the speculation

 

[fishwomp]

... and a Network Rail press release dated 2 October 2024 confirmed that, after more digging by Thames Water and Kier,

Any such 'options', will, I surmise, include substantial descoping.

It sounds ominous, but at this point, with scarcely any activity on site at the bridge due to the issues currently being described, you'd wonder if a plan B was being looked at. For example, one benefit is going to be a deeper road enabling full size double deckers. Scratch that and you maybe reinstate the status quo. Or lift the railway up a foot - it may be feasible after all, if Thames Water can't make things work with the current plan, then plan B will be needed