Chiltern Evergreen 3 project - ongoing discussion

[whole diary]

[ChrisB]

The junction that leads directly to it, yes.

But as I understand it, it wasn't mandatory info.

[paul7575]

Here's some specimen paragraphs from the inspector's report:

Operational Effects On Road Traffic
9.7.4 The effects of the Scheme over a wide area including much of Oxford, Bicester and a large area beyond have been assessed using Oxfordshire County Council^s Central Oxfordshire Transport Model, which includes a SATURN model of the Scheme rail passenger catchment. The SATURN model meets the acceptability criteria of the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges, and forecasts conditions in the morning and evening peak hours (0800 to 0900 and 1700 to 1800) [4.7.16, 4.7.27]. There was no reasoned challenge to this modelling, and I am satisfied that it provides a reasonable estimation of future traffic conditions for the two hours modelled.

9.7.5 The modelling finds that traffic conditions would improve in the peak hours as a result of the Scheme. The applicant offers the following table by way of illustration [4.7.23], and it seems to me that the benefits in the morning peak hour would be proportionately slight:

[and]

9.7.7 Locations close to the Water Eaton station site were modelled in more detail in a way accepted by the local highway authority and, in the case of the A34(T), the Highways Agency. The findings were that at these locations (where the traffic generated by the scheme would be most concentrated) and with the proposed alterations at the entrance to the park and ride site, the Scheme would have no unacceptable effect on traffic conditions [4.7.18] and those findings are not challenged by either of the highway authorities.

9.7.8 I therefore find that operation of the Scheme would, when considered across the network as a whole have no unacceptable effect on peak hour road traffic conditions, and would result in slight improvements in peak hour journey time, distance travelled, overall average speed, emissions of carbon dioxide, queuing, and number of trips.

So I hope Radio Oxford aren't trying to trigger a further set of late objections.  Just what is the point of their story?

Paul

[ChrisB]

I suspect its the radio station simply reporting the concerns of local residents, rather than stiring things up...

[paul7575]

Hopefully - but it would be good if they could inform as well as entertain...

"Local residents, voicing concerns about the traffic implications of the expanded Park and Ride site, were apparently unaware that the relevant highway authorities had already approved the plans."

Paul

[ChrisB]

Maybe they did - I didn't hear the broadcast, and if you're interested, I'm sure its on Radio iplayer.

[IanL]

I wonder if the analysis was based on the existing road layout.....a layout which it is proposed to alter with the diversion of significant traffic flows from the A40 eastbound directly to the frieze way roundabout with a link road? This will create a directly link into the Water Eaton site from the west without going via the Wolvercote and Peartree junctions which are solid from 0730 onwards but has a negative effect on the southbound A44 traffic.

Here's hoping that both schemes progress together and are analysed together.

[Andrew1939 from West Oxon]

The objection seems to be that the Watereaton station will attract more visitors over and above the existing City P & R users increasing the traffic outside on the Kidlington/Oxford road thus lengthening queuing and delays. What the objector seems to have forgotten is that with a 30 minute frequency rail service between Bicester and Oxford, a lot of motorists are likely to abandon their car and get on the train to get to work in Oxford. It will certainly save the daily commuter a lot of time over driving. Therefore to some extent more motorists driving to Watereaton to go by train to London will be offset by fewer motorists on the road between Bicester and Oxford. The question remaining is therefore, will one change of flow offset the other?

[swrural]

There is a debate here about an 'objection'.

Objection to what?  All I have read, reading back through the thread, is a local radio programme article without any reference to something that has to be sorted out through legal or planning processes.

However, taking the issue on board, any jams caused by park and ride access is an argument for increasing the frequency of the service from the park and ride, *not* not building the facility in the first place.

[ChrisB]

Reported to me....from someone present at he meeting

Last night at the Bedford - Bletchley Users' Association AGM^▸ (Annual General Meeting), Patrick O'Sullivan EWRC's Project Manager confirmed that the Consortium's objective was to have Bedford - Cambridge included in HLOS^▸ (High Level Output Specification) 3 due for issue in July 2017. The project would then be completed in CP6^▸ (Control Period 6 - The five year period between 2019 and 2024) between 2019 and 2024. However, they have still not advanced their route studies.

[TonyK]

Hopefully - but it would be good if they could inform as well as entertain...

"Local residents, voicing concerns about the traffic implications of the expanded Park and Ride site, were apparently unaware that the relevant highway authorities had already approved the plans."

Paul

I knew that, and I live about 80 miles away. It is possible to live in an idyllic beauty spot, next door to a proposed sewage plant, incinerator, and 12-lane motorway, yet know nothing about it. It is more difficult now than when an advert in the London Gazette fulfilled the need for consultation in many cases. Maybe they do it differently in the Chilterns. In Bristol, the local planners tell us what we want, ignore the howls of protest, then go ahead anyway, sparking planning inquiries, court cases, and even direct action. Come election time, it gives candidates for the council something to hang an otherwise spurious and boring campaign on, but at least we all knew about the project. Because if we didn't before, someone would tell us. We take an interest in these things.

Don't we?

[IndustryInsider]

Judicial review decision should be sometime in March to allow a start in early May. Still nowt about line closure length & alternatives for what could be anything up to 18 months.

Any news on this yet?  The Evergreen 3 site is still well out of date, but Chiltern's website links to the new timetable download currently aren't working, so I can't see if their timetable mentions any closure from Oxford to Bicester during the summer timetable - however the journey planners seem to think that trains will still be running.

[ChrisB]

The new Chiltern TT is here in pdf format.

It does mention that the line closure is due within the life of the TT, so before 7 December.

The judge did make a quick appearance earlier this month - just said something like "Right, I'll take a look at this", banged his gavel & walked out....

So....everyone still waits. Chiltern think a positive judgement might still be able to be appealed, but thought they'd [probably go ahead even if it was. But they definitely are waiting for the review judgement before going ahead with the main works - although earth moving has taken place on the embankment south of Bicester North on the main line recently.

Chiltern have also stated that they'll adhere to the requirement to give 12 clear weeks notice of the line closuire date once a positive judgement is received - but noone knows just how long that'll be.

I tried to prompt them into saying when the absolute cut-off date was for works to commence in time for Oxford services to start in Dec15, but they wouldn't yet be drawn on that. Seeing as talk is of a 2 year closure, and they need to be sure at T-12 for Dec15 timetable release, and of course NR^» (Network Rail - home page) require Dec15 TT bids in by Feb15....this can't be very far away.

Although I guess they can bid the service, and withdraw it before T-12....

[IndustryInsider]

Thanks, Chris.  Another appeal?!

The new Chiltern TT is here in pdf format.

Though I get a 'page not available' message from that link...

[ChrisB]

They think an appeal against Judicial Review is possible, yes. This current appeal is against the Inspector....

re the pdf, interesting. just tried clicking on the copied link in your post and I can access it using IE9

[IndustryInsider]

Thanks for that, yes, it does open in IE, but not Firefox!