Sir – Mr Leach’s proposal for a monorail connecting Witney to Oxford (Letters, February 19) recognises the importance of a non-road link between the two places but has two major flaws.

The first is environmental acceptability: monorail systems are visually highly intrusive. The nearest to the city centre one can conceive of a monorail reaching is the station via the rail corridor along the edge of Port Meadow.  The concerns that recent improvements to the rail lines have engendered among your correspondents would be as nothing to the reaction to a monorail between them and Port Meadow.

The second is its lack of connectivity. Once at the station it would be a case of ‘all change’ to other modes (train, bus, bike or foot).  The alternatives – in order of preference, but also of cost -‘heavy’ rail (ie normal trains), light rail (trams or tram-trains) or a guided busway all have the advantage of seamless onward transport.

Trains can continue on the existing lines: one possibility would be a Witney-Cowley Branch service if proposals to reinstate passenger services on the latter go ahead. Tram lines are cheaper to construct than conventional rail, and fit better into the urban fabric.  Tram-trains (which operate successfully in Germany) can run on both types of line, so a tramline from, say, Carterton to Oxford via Witney, could have a junction on to the railway near Wolvercote and use it to run down into Oxford station, and possibly beyond. Guided busways are the cheapest to construct, and the buses can leave the busway to run on the road to extend their reach.

Because of their greater connectivity, any of these options have potentially much greater benefits than a monorail. A guided busway would also be cheaper than a monorail.

Henry Brougham, Kidlington