Sir – I felt obliged to respond to Henry Brougham’s criticism of a Witney-to-Oxford monorail (Letters, March 5).

The first ‘flaw’ that he identified was one of environmental acceptability, particularly the visual impact on Port Meadow.

I’d like to point out that it is possible to design the guideway to be constructed at height (‘above grade’) where required (to avoid existing road junctions, rail lines etc.) but close to the ground (‘at grade’) if preferable. If the section of the route alongside existing rail lines adjacent to Port Meadow was at grade level, the visual impact could be no greater than that of the existing railway. I would argue that electrification of those lines is more likely to adversely affect the views.

Mr Brougham’s second concern was one of connectivity. He states that alternatives such as heavy rail, light rail and guided busway would provide for ‘seamless’ onward travel. It is not predetermined that it would be operationally possible for heavy/light rail to easily track share with mainline services as suggested.

It is also uncertain that a guided busway would result in services from Carterton/Witney being extended beyond Oxford.

A monorail system into Oxford station with up to four arrivals/departures every hour would provide an acceptable level of connectivity with rail services by means of a straightforward platform change.

Mr Brougham’s alternatives would all require a greater ‘land-take’ than monorail. With the rail options; trackbed preparation, negotiating existing roads and longer construction time would all add significantly to the cost.

I would suggest that it is unwise to make assumptions about the cost of any of these proposals before capital expenditure estimates have been secured which, at the very least, take into account the exact route-alignment and infrastructure provision (and modification) required for their construction.

David Leach, For and on behalf of WestOx Monorail