Call for action over Bicester rail crossing closure plans

4:00pm Friday 1st March 2013 in News By Sam McGregor, covering Bicester. Call me on 01869 250197

Concerns: James Porter Buy this photo » Concerns: James Porter

COUNCILLORS are demanding Network Rail sorts out major issues about a level crossing that will be closed to traffic for about 24 minutes of every hour.

Bicester town councillors propose to call on the rail firm to build a bridge at London Road crossing to “alleviate potential traffic issues”.

The move comes weeks after councillors were told the crossing would be down for 24 minutes in every hour once the new East West rail link is opened in 2017.

Chiltern Railways chief project engineer Stephen Barker said traffic modelling predicted the crossing would be down for a maximum of four minutes at a time, and there would be enough time for traffic to disperse.

Town councillor James Porter said: “We support the rail improvements, but they have to recognise there are going to be more trains going across that junction and they need to think about a solution.

“Twenty-four minutes, that’s almost half an hour in every hour and you are going to get an accumulation of traffic backing up.”

Related links

Comments(11)

gree0115 says...
4:38pm Fri 1 Mar 13

I sent an email regarding this when the public enquiry was in full swing, I never received a reply. Chiltern Railways are proposing 3 trains per hour in each direction which would mean the road will be closed for almost half an hour every hour. I think it definitely needs a bridge, it's one of the main access roads in to town.

Report this post »

Andrew:Oxford says...
6:03pm Fri 1 Mar 13

Closed for 24 minutes every hour...

I call that "effective traffic calming with no direct cost to the local authority".

Report this post »

Stephen WJ says...
10:31pm Fri 1 Mar 13

This 24 minute figure has been known ever since this project was first mooted? So it's now a bit rich of our ineffective town council to suddenly propose something as preposterous as a bridge - after the enquiry finished eons ago. Where were these concerns then?

Ego town that no one wants nor the town needs, exemplar project with no long-term plan, conning Sainbury's to invest then allowing Tesco expansion, failure to get a grip on BV traffic, vanity mayoral chain, no cemetery plots, Garth House roof saga...

Dreary me - look what happens when there's no political opposition...

Report this post »

Panda69 says...
11:56pm Sat 2 Mar 13

Where on earth is a bridge going to fit? I can see the issue but a bridge just isnt feasable. How about making the route into town a 7.5 ton limit so all the larger vehicles have to use the bypass and the North end of Launton Road, this would also make the stretch of Launton Road by Garth Park safer.

Report this post »

Stephen WJ says...
9:07am Sun 3 Mar 13

Panda69 wrote:
Where on earth is a bridge going to fit? I can see the issue but a bridge just isnt feasable. How about making the route into town a 7.5 ton limit so all the larger vehicles have to use the bypass and the North end of Launton Road, this would also make the stretch of Launton Road by Garth Park safer.
Great idea Panda. I predict that this will be implemented AFTER the rail line is open - probably about two tears after, when the whole thing descends into total chaos and the local Tories backtrack and blame the lack of a bridge (despite not raising this earlier when something could have been done about it) - isn't that usually what happens around here?!

Report this post »

Nick Mawer says...
8:48pm Sun 3 Mar 13

Stephen WJ your blind prejudice has caused you to display a total ignorance of this matter. The local Conservatives at both Town and District level have been concerned since the proposals first saw light of day several years ago. Now, I can't say why you were not aware of this, it has been discussed in public on several times, and representations have been made to Chiltern Railways, Oxfordshire County Council and Central Government. If you only get your Bicester news through the Oxford Mail/Bicester Advertiser - you might ask them why you didn't know about this/

Report this post »

Stephen WJ says...
9:35pm Sun 3 Mar 13

Nick Mawer wrote:
Stephen WJ your blind prejudice has caused you to display a total ignorance of this matter. The local Conservatives at both Town and District level have been concerned since the proposals first saw light of day several years ago. Now, I can't say why you were not aware of this, it has been discussed in public on several times, and representations have been made to Chiltern Railways, Oxfordshire County Council and Central Government. If you only get your Bicester news through the Oxford Mail/Bicester Advertiser - you might ask them why you didn't know about this/
Nick Mawer, your tone, which I've seen several times on message boards like this, is one of the reasons I tore up my continuous 23 year membership of the Conservative party a last month - ask your North Oxford Treasurer to check their standing order! Total arrogance and disrespect for the people who put you in your job.

I stand corrected on this point (much to your satisfaction I'm sure) but you have to admit, it's a bit late to suddenly start showing public concern about this stuff.

For your info, I didn't have to think very hard to come up with a list of 'Tory town shambles' examples in post 3 above, illustrating my point of how out of touch you and your ilk are...and there's more...

Daft pedestrianisation of Market Square (me thinks this ridiculous idea has been quietly dumped), car park price hike/hit on disabled and subsequent u-turn, idiotic barriers around the relocated town centre brook (and subsequent removal at tax payers expense no doubt), planning industrial units on top of Greenwood Homes...

Get a grip, oh, and please be more respectful to your electorate.

Report this post »

Nick Mawer says...
9:33am Mon 4 Mar 13

Hi Stephen,
I can take fair criticism, some of which you rightly raise. I will practice some deep breathing exercises before posting.
The pedestrianisation of Market Square is only on hold as far as I know; there are arguments on both sides here. I suspect when the new part of the town centre is open, and people naturally congregate in those parts, that there will be a demand to do something to revamp Market Square, and we will see similar schemes brought back, but I do not pretend to know what the end result will look like. What I do know is that there were plenty of town centre users who really liked the scheme as proposed, but I also know that the business on "Wadleys" side of road felt that the scheme would adversely affect them.

The barriers round the brook were erected by the developer on the insistence of County Council Officials. It was your local politicians who persuaded those officials to rethink their original instruction.

Finally I agree, we got it wrong over the town centre parking charges for disabled people. We tried to put that right.

I can't promise that we will never make another mistake, but we try hard not to. I invite people to contact their local councillors directly if they are unhappy with something.

Report this post »

Geoff Grace says...
11:26am Mon 4 Mar 13

Has anyone actually checked what representations were made at the public enquiry by Bicester Town Council, Cherwell District council or Oxfordshire County Council ?

Report this post »

Stephen WJ says...
1:42pm Mon 4 Mar 13

Cllr Mawer - good reply - that's more like it. I work in PR - and starting a reply to an angry 'client' (even if you do think they're wrong) with "...your blind prejudice has caused you to display a total ignorance of this matter..." isn't good.

Being a dyed in the wool Tory, I've always been prepared to give the party the benefit of the doubt. But you do need to connect more and reflect the views of your electorate - something I fear you've lost sight of (as well as losing my vote).

Let's hope Bicester gets its bridge - 24+ mins of level crossing downtime will be a disaster for town centre trade.

Report this post »

Nick Mawer says...
4:11pm Mon 4 Mar 13

In light of this discussion, I have suggested that Bicester Town Council publishes its responses to consultations online, this should make them easier to find.

On the issue of the bridge, the town council also asked whether there would be a possibility of extending Gavray drive up and over the railway to Launton Road if it turned out not to be possible to construct a viable bridge at London Road. No doubt those people who live near Gavray drive would much prefer a solution at London Rd, and those who live or work near London Rd, would prefer a solution near Gavray drive.

Report this post »

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree