I think the chance of getting this thread back is pretty slim. However it it comes back, feel free to delete this thread! Infact I would've thought it likeley that thread was already oversized...

The purpose of each line:

NORTH line
-to provide reliable, quick transport through some of the UK's largest student communities.
-To serve 2 universities and the Headingley campus.
-To relieve congestion on the busy Harrogate line.
-To relieve congestion on the A65/A660 by providing an alternative and allowing cars from outside of Leeds to use the park and ride sites.
EXTENSION to Leeds Bradford International Airport could be a popular extension, providing quick and reliable transport to one of the UKs fastest growing airports.

EAST line
-to provide a catalyst for regeneration in some of Leeds' poorest areas.
-to provide the only alternative to road travel in this area of Leeds.
-to relieve the busy A58 and A64 corridors and allow York & Wetherby residents to use the park and ride site.
-to serve one of the regions most important hospitals, St. James' university hospital.
-to serve Seacroft and the Seacroft centre.

SOUTH line (revised)
-to serve the fast developing eastern riverside district around Brewery Wharf.
-to serve Clarence Dock, in which the Royal Armouries, shops, apartments, offices, arena and casino are/will be.
-to provide a park and ride site at possibly the city's busiest gateway from the M1/M621 at Stourton.
SOUTH line (to Tingley)
-to serve the subruban Middleton area
-to provide park and ride near the M62, resulting in no extra traffic into the city (hopefully).

CITY CENTRE route
-to link Leeds Station & Interchange, Leeds Bus Station and Boar Lane bus point.
-to provide transport to a more specific destination in the city centre.
-to serve the proposed Eastgate/Harewood quarters.
-to provide transport from 5 shopping centres and the market to Leeds Station/Bus Station.
-to serve Millennium Square and The Headrow.
-to serve Briggate and lower Briggate via Boar Lane tram stop.
POSSIBLE improvements:
-new stop at the Corn Exchange
-new stops along a possible new line on Westgate or Wellington Street.
-new stop at lower Briggate
-new stop on Park Row, possibly where Bond Street meets Park Row.

EXTENSIONS
NB: No extension will be commenced until the current Leeds supertram has been built.
-West Leeds line. To link Leeds and Bradford relieving busy rail and bus routes and linking 2 of the UK's largest cities.
-A northern line to serve Chapeltown, Chapel Allerton, Moortown and Alwoodley.
-A south west Leeds line to serve Elland Road, White Rose Centre and Morley.
-there are 20 possible corridors which could use a light rail/supertram in West Yorkshire.

general facts:
-the Leeds supertram would serve over 22m people (with the southern extension) every year, or 19m people with the current bid.
-75% of line will be on a tramway.
-the network would total 21km or 28km with the southern extension.
-supertram will link development sites and 6 of the most deprived wards, bringing the city closer together.
-40 trams will operate at speeds up to 45mph.
-50 tram stops will be provided.
-Thirty-two thousand new jobs are due to be created in Leeds in the next 10 years, representing 40% of the region’s total job growth. With 70% of those new jobs likely to be filled by people coming from outside the city, there is not the capacity for those numbers of extra vehicles. A fast and efficient means of getting these people into, out of and around the city is essential.

www.leeds-supertram.co.uk

The tram thread for MerseyTram also dissapeared after the hackattack. Hope it's not a sign of things to come with pending announcements. Both city's need these tram systems to go ahead, to link in all the new developments going on and to help reduce car useage and pollution. Lets hope for good news before Thur 21/07/05.

yeah both cities do, I was just making the case for the simple fact that Nobby asked, coz I would guess he would think Manchester needs its extension (notice it already has one so probably could wait a bit longer).

Leeds could simply collapse and be back at square one without infrastructure.

Supertram Decision Needed

...before 21st July

With just a week to go before the House of Commons breaks for the summer recess on Thursday 21 July, Leeds Council leaders and West Yorkshire transport bosses are calling urgently for a decision to be made on the future of Leeds Supertram.

“For the Supertram Team to be able to buy the land required for the scheme before Compulsory Purchase Powers run out in March 2006, a decision on funding for the scheme is needed from Ministers before the House of Commons begins its summer break,” warned Metro Chairman Cllr Karam Hussain.

“The team must start the acquisition process by the beginning of September at the very latest and Parliament doesn’t reconvene until 10 October, so we need the go-ahead and we need it now.”

Leeds City Council Leader, Cllr Mark Harris said, “Ministers and officials at the Department for Transport have made statements saying that they are aware of the time limitations faced by Leeds yet still they have failed to provide us with an answer.

“In a recent letter to Leeds MP Greg Mulholland, Transport Minister Derek Twigg said he understood the time constraints connected with this scheme and that he hoped to make a decision shortly,” continued Councillor Harris

“We are now getting perilously close to the deadline.”

Since meeting former Transport Minister Tony McNulty in March, Metro’s Supertram Team has submitted to the Department for Transport all the extra information requested, including additional financial modelling which has been approved by the District Auditor and the Audit Commission.

“If the powers to purchase the 120 or so packages of land required for Supertram do expire, the scheme will be cancelled by default and more than a decade of work will have been wasted,” said Councillor Andrew Carter, who will become Leader of Leeds City Council in December 2005.

”Leeds would then face going through a new and lengthy Public Works Inquiry and a renewed procurement process, which would set the long overdue scheme back further and cost millions more.”

He continued, “As Tom Morton, President of Leeds Chamber of Commerce, said recently in the Yorkshire Post, the Supertram project would be a major boost to the development of our city, as well as that of the wider region, and its future.”

Given that it looks unlikely that this will go ahead as one large system, if the decision is to build one line at a time - which line do you think will be 'line 1'.

The South Line will be the first line to be built, as the operations centre will be located here and without it the rest of the system will not be possible- unless of course the whole system is replanned and the operations centre moved...

I'd have thought the system may have to be redesigned. Isn't the southern line the one that has been cropped to save costs - building half of what was going to be built, along with the city centre bit may not be a very viable scheme.

For what it's worth, parliment business is cancelled today as a mark of respect to Ted Heath - remember that the announcements last year were on the penultimate day before the summer break, so there may still be good news on Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday - here's hoping anyway.

The South Line will be the first line to be built, as the operations centre will be located here and without it the rest of the system will not be possible- unless of course the whole system is replanned and the operations centre moved...

I also think the South line. Interestingly, this was the original proposal for a Leeds tram system. Had it kept to that it maight have been built and the other lines built subsequently - we may alreadyy have had all three lines running in other words. Something to be said for starting modestly and buliding up from that.

The southern line has been cropped to where it spurs to Stourton Park and Ride site. The City Centre route doesn't really count as a line, but a loop to link all 3 lines. The City Centre route hasn't been changed, only the south line. It should be just as much as viable as the full scheme as it goes to the original spur, so would still provide a park and ride site and serve the most important stops- Clarence Dock/Riverside/Stourton.

Nothing about Transport on the parliment schedule...

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmwib/ahead.htm

out of interest, how much is the local media making of this story as D day gets nearer?

Zilch !

um, quite interesting.

I wonder how much this type of thing plays when governments make decisions like this.

I wonder if being in a position of having to make 'unpopular' decisions they will take the one that will cause less of a stir than the alternative would be.

I fully understand the reasons why there is more coverage of this in cities that already have a system, but I'd have thought the local papers would have at least one story a day on the subject, the odd editorial maybe even petitions and open letters to the people that matter.

Following 19th July last year, the local rag ran about 2 or 3 pro tram stories over here every day for several weeks - as I say, I understand the reason there would be more as we have a system already, but absolutely nothing is a bog surprise.

Out of interest, do the local papers campaign on local issues, or simply report them?

and are they generally pro or anti tram?

and are they generally pro or anti tram?
Right a quick sweep of recent articles from the Yorkshire Evening Post reveals hardly one a day (more like one every 2 months) and fairly neutral....

I will try and post them consecutively. There was also one from earlier this week that I cannot find..

THE £40M GAMBLE
By DAVID MARSH

Leeds Supertram, which the city is desperately trying to save, has so far cost taxpayers £40m.
The scheme now faces an uncertain future amid fears the Government will not fund the cost of £800m-£1,000m – almost double the expected sum.
The bulk of the cash has been spent on buying land.
Work on building the three lines, which will cover a total of 28km, has now been delayed by ministers.
Transport Secretary Alistair Darling has asked the city to see if savings can be made, leading to widespread concerns that the plug will be pulled on Supertram in Leeds.
Defended
Metro – West Yorkshire's Passenger Transport Executive which is heading the project – defended the sums so far invested.
A Metro spokesman said: "The £40m that has been invested in Supertram is in line with the pre-bidding period for other similar projects such as Manchester's Metrolink.
"As soon as all statutory powers and formal written approval for Supertram were received from the Government in 2001, the process of buying land began. This avoids costly and lengthy delays.
"A successful consortium would expect to be able to begin work as soon as possible after being awarded a contract.
"It was therefore important to purchase complicated plots of land, such as at Stourton for the tram depot, as soon as possible.
"Because land increases in value, purchases were carried out as swiftly as possible to help reduce overall costs. All the land purchased would now realise more than its cost if sold."
But Coun Andrew Carter, Leeds City Council's Tory group leader, said: "(This] merely underlines the predicament that Metro and the city council are in and graphically highlights the shambles the Government has created.
Estimates
"Land values can rise but those values in south Leeds without Supertram could prove to be a different matter."
Original estimates for the project were about £500m, with the Government expected to contribute about £355m, but tenders for the work proved to be much higher. Metro and the council want the Government to increase its contribution.
Leeds's private and public sectors are now united in a campaign to persuade ministers to press ahead with Supertram, arguing that the scheme will bring benefits – including jobs and investment – which far outweigh the cost. Coun Keith Wakefield, council leader, said: "The fact that we have already committed £40m shows how determined we are to make it happen.
"As demonstrated by the all-party support at the council meeting on Wednesday and the lobby by local business leaders, people from across the city are determined in their campaign to get the Government to back Supertram."
david.marsh@ypn.co.uk

02 March 2004

Stop this Supertram semi-hysteria: Plea
BY DAVID MARSH

NEGATIVE headlines and "semi-hysterical comments" surrounding the troubled Leeds Supertram project could cost the city jobs and investment, senior councillors fear.
The £800m project is currently under review amid concerns the Government cannot afford the higher than expected cost. Initial estimates for Supertram put the figure at about £500m.
Coun Andrew Carter, the council's Conservative group leader, said he had both read and heard comments that without Supertram, Leeds would grind to a halt.
He told the council's Executive Board: "The city needs Supertram for many reasons, but it is not grinding to a halt because it does not have one.
"We need less semi-hysterical comments and fewer predictions of some sort of transport Armageddon. Leeds needs to compete internationally, and nothing will harm us more than false and negative messages about the city. They will serve only to deter potential investors."
He was backed by Coun Keith Wakefield, council leader, who said it was right that the city lobbied hard for Supertram, but he added that other factors, such as increasing educational achievement and skills levels, were also important for the city's future success.
Development
He added: "We need to be careful about the message we put out."
The councillors made their comments during discussions about the new Vision For Leeds II document, a blueprint which will help shape the city's future for the next 16 years.
It will be published later this year by the Leeds Initiative, the city's public-private sector partnership.
The development of Supertram's three proposed lines is a key part of the Vision.
Leeds haulage company boss and former Chamber of Commerce president, Stuart Archbold, an initiative member who helped present the document to the board, said: "Supertram is at the centre of what the Vision is about."
david.marsh@ypn.co.uk
15 March 2004

Twilight of the tram
Although sympathising and agreeing with much of what David S Boyes (Letters, July 30) and others have said of late against Supertram, I must say that local politicians are not unanimously in support of that undead creature of the transport twilight in the manner which is sometimes put about.

All six Morley Borough Independent members of Leeds City Council are against Supertram, as has been made clear in the council chamber. Admittedly that leaves 93 nominally in favour, but, a crack has shown which can only grow. Most Morley Town councillors are against Supertram, and some months ago that council passed a resolution asking for the scheme to be ended.
Since the June elections, I have been appointed to the board of Metro, so at least one of its 22 members is now anti-Supertram. Metro has a new chairman, Coun J S King of Bradford rather than Leeds, and, although "no change" was his immediate view of Supertram policy, Metro has changed its political and geographical centres of gravity so much that thorough-going policy reviews are almost certain, even if people set out trying to avoid them.
In a way, John Battle MP is right in wanting to build a Supertram route from Leeds to Bradford; an obvious weakness of the proposed Leeds system is that really it does not go anywhere, being made up of three fairly short out-and-back suburban routes.
However, Mr Boyes rightly says that the practical and financial difficulties of getting to Bradford would be so horrific that the extension could not be worthwhile.
It is time to lay Supertram to rest, so that full attention can be given to improving those bus and local railway services which people need to be able to rely on.
COUN TOM LEADLEY, Leeds City Council, Morley North Ward and Board Member, Metro

07 August 2004

Region blueprint backs Supertram
By Anne Alexander
Parliamentary Corrrespondent

The Government has accepted that Leeds Supertram is a priority for the area, just months after the whole scheme was shelved by Transport Secretary Alistair Darling.
A document, published by Office of the Deputy Prime Minister setting out the future of transport in Yorkshire and the Humber, has included the system in the long-term plans for the region.
The future of Leeds Supertram hangs on Mr Darling after he rejected the first bid for the light rail system in the summer due to costs spiralling from £500million to almost £1billion
Mr Darling is currently considering a new scaled-down bid for Leeds Supertram which his officials have said has a 70 per cent chance of going ahead.
Essential
The Regional Spatial Strategy for Yorkshire and Humber, which was published by planning minister Keith Hill, puts up Leeds Supertram as an essential part of the future transport network in West Yorkshire.
"Light rail systems can have an important role to play in delivering integrated transport in major conurbations," the report said.
"Experience from existing light rail schemes shows that they can be effective in providing a high-quality public transport option in densely used transport corridors and in encouraging motorists to switch from their cars.
"Leeds Supertram, and extensions to the South Yorkshire Supertram, are both included as transport investment priorities."
Leeds West MP John Battle said: "That is great news.
"I note the fact the Leeds Supertram was backed by Yorkshire Forward (the regional development agency) at its recent relaunch which shows that what is being recognised is that the tram has a strategic regional dimension.
"If 30,000 cars come into Leeds every morning and 30,000 leave every night, it is not just people in Leeds .
"There are people from the surrounding areas who are accessing jobs.
"I am keen to get this core system up and running because once we have that we can also push for the extension out to Bradford."
Clog
He added: "It should be noted that there is nothing else on the table.
"There are no other options such as building an underground or a new bridge.
"It is either the Leeds Supertram or more clog."
A revised bid was submitted to Mr Darling last month which is closer to the original budget.
anne.alexander@ypn.co.uk
03 December 2004

'Superbus better than Supertram'
By Howard Williamson
SUPERBUS would be a better bet for Leeds than Supertram, said a local conservationist and historian.
David Hall, a member of Leeds Civic Trust's planning committee, said Metro, the body which supervises West Yorkshire public transport, compares Supertram favourably with guided buses, but fails to compare it with a Superbus.
"By which I mean a cleaner-fuel, state-of-the-art vehicle which offers the same comfort and reliability as the tram but is not fixed to a rail.
"Much cheaper than the tram, much more flexible, and, for the cost of Supertram, city-wide routes could be developed quickly and with minimum disruption during the construction phase."
Writing in the trust's latest newsletter, Mr Hall said Supertram should be quieter and cleaner than the city's stock of conventional buses.
"But it is not proposed to run on renewable energy, and so it is not carbon clean.
Package
"And in order to accommodate the tram it is proposed to narrow some pavements, take out certain bus lanes, reduce cycle lanes, put up unsightly overhead power cable and remove trees."
Mr Hall said access to Leeds depended on a package of measures - demand management, attractive thoroughfares for walking and cycling, and safe school routes.
"Without these ingredients, Supertram will certainly not add up for Leeds. For, assuredly, what else is to be done will matter more than Supertram in reducing congestion and pollution."
Civic Trust director Kevin Grady, who supports Supertram, estimates the service would carry an estimated 19m passengers a year, of whom a quarter would be former car users.
Transport Secretary Alistair Darling last year ruled that the escalating cost of the Supertram project was "unacceptable" and ordered a review. He is still studying cut-price proposals.
In September his own chief civil servant gave the scheme a 70pc chance of going ahead. But Mr Darling is said to think the cost to the Government of £355m is still too high.
howard.williamson@ypn.co.uk
20 January 2005

Minister: There's no anti-tram conspiracy
Supertram bid under discussion
By Anne Alexander Political Editor
THE man who holds the power to give the go-ahead to Leeds Supertram has admitted he is impressed by the revised bid.
Transport minister Tony McNulty said it was clear a lot of work had gone into the new plans for the light rail system, submitted after the original bid was rejected for being too expensive.
He said that the delegation from West Yorkshire – which included members of Metro the passenger transport executive met him last week and had put their case for Supertram "robustly".
The minister vowed that a decision, which is ultimately the responsibility of Transport Secretary Alistair Darling, would be made at the earliest opportunity.
Mr McNulty spoke to the YEP after appearing before MPs on the Commons transport committee who are investigating the future of light rail.
He said: "They stated their case robustly.
"I certainly applaud the work they have done. They have been very forthcoming and have obviously put a lot of work into it.
"The decision will be taken at the earliest opportunity."
During the hearing, Mr McNulty insisted that the Government had not gone "cool" on the idea of light rail, following decisions to withdraw promised funding for both Leeds Supertram and also for the Manchester Metro Link.
Push
He said: "I can manifestly say there is no gang of civil servants on the grassy knoll with a second rifle. There is no conspiracy against light rail but we need to judge each project on their own terms . That is what we are trying to do.
John Battle MP (Leeds West) said: "We should not get cold feet at this stage.
"This is obviously the right time to be really pushing for Supertram and keep Leeds in the mind of the Government.
"I don't mean just Leeds. This is not just about Leeds, it is good for the whole of West Yorkshire.
A revised £355m bid for the Supertram was made last year after the original plan was rejected when the costs spiralled out of control.
anne.alexander@ypn.co.uk
16 March 2005

Supertram minister impressed by bid
By Anne Alexander
Political Editor

THE man who holds the power to give the go-ahead to Leeds Supertram has admitted he is impressed by the revised bid.

Transport minister Tony McNulty said it was clear a lot of work had gone into the new plans for the light rail system, submitted after the original bid was rejected for being too expensive.

He said that the delegation from West Yorkshire – which included members of Metro – had met him last week and had put their case for Supertram “robustly”.

The minister vowed that a decision, which is ultimately the responsibility of Transport Secretary Alistair Darling, would be made at the earliest opportunity.

Mr McNulty spoke after appearing before MPs on the Commons transport committee who are investigating the future of light rail.

He said: “They stated their case robustly. I certainly applaud the work they have done. They have been very forthcoming and have obviously put a lot of work into it.

Promised

“The decision will be taken at the earliest opportunity.”

During the hearing, Mr McNulty insisted that the Government had not gone “cool” on the idea of light rail, following decisions to withdraw promised funding for both Leeds Supertram and also for the Manchester Metro Link.

John Battle MP (Leeds West) said: “We should not get cold feet at this stage. This is obviously the right time to be really pushing for Supertram and keep Leeds in the mind of the Government.

“I don’t mean just Leeds, it is good for the whole of West Yorkshire.”

A revised £355m bid for the Supertram was made last year.

He said: “They stated their case robustly. I certainly applaud the work they have done. They have been very forthcoming and have obviously put a lot of work into it.


Wishout wishing to be negative, that sounds to me like a 6/10 (for effort). Nothing in that statement makes me optimistic that we'll get the decision to go ahead.

Hope I'm wrong though.

Well at least its not all bad...

Well there is only 2 days to go now - last years announcement was on the penultamate day before the summer recess - same again this time hopefully but with a positive message hopefully.

Interesting Sky news reckon after 2007 transport spending may rise massively, but until then spening will be low.

the actual costs of Crossrail will be between £15bn and £16bn!!!

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2005-07-19.1123.0&s=speaker%3A10153#g1205.1

Article on Supertram Website:

Leeds astonished...
...by Darling's Supertram silence

Leeds transport bosses have expressed their astonishment, concern and anger that Alistair Darling has no plans to make an announcement about the future of Leeds Supertram before the end of this session of Parliament tomorrow.

“It is disgraceful that the Government is treating Leeds in this offhand manner,” said the current Leeds City Council Leader Councillor Mark Harris today.

“Alistair Darling and DfT officials are fully aware that we are fast approaching a date beyond which the scheme will be extremely difficult to deliver, due to the expiry of Compulsory Purchase Powers in March 2006, yet they still refuse to make a decision.”

“This reflects the Government's lack of any clear policy on transport or on the development of the city’s and regions outside London and the south east.

“What is the point of the Government publishing grand strategies such as its ‘Northern Way’, which claims to be a strategic plan to increase investment and economic drive across the north and then being unable to make a decision on a vital element of that plan such as Supertram?” said Councillor Andrew Carter, joint Leader of Leeds City Council.

“Where is the strategic thinking?” he asked. “Does the Government’s left hand know what the right hand is doing?”

“We have supplied all the information requested by the Department for Transport so what more they can possibly want to know before making a decision ?” said Metro Chairman Councillor Karam Hussain.

“The Supertram Team needs to start acquiring 120 or so packages of land in September otherwise the current Supertram scheme will be in danger of being cancelled by default, so we can only hope that the DfT plans to announce a decision over the summer during the parliamentary recess,” he warned.

“If we were to run out of time, Leeds would face a lengthy new Public Works Inquiry and procurement process, which would set the long overdue and much needed scheme back further and cost millions more.”

Transport Minister Derek Twigg recently wrote to Leeds MP Greg Mulholland, saying he understood the time constraints connected with the scheme.

Leeds MP Fabian Hamilton has tabled a written question asking when a decision is likely to be made but that is unlikely to receive a reply until Parliament reconvenes in October.

If you ask me, its failed. If he has no plans to do anything I feel it won't go much further. When they resume after summer could they give the green light then? Could the land be purchased fast enough in that time?
I totally agree with that article which I just read on the site and was actually just about to come and post it here. If the government don't put any considerable amount of money into the north then how do they expect to get anywhere. It seems they don't think much out of the south east. The crowded SE can be relieved if the north is allowed to improve and grow. It'll probably backfire on them in the long term in some way or other.

If Darling says nothing tomorrow - which appears to be the case - this is dead, dead as a dead do-do.

This is not good news, not good at all, he is basically leaving it to die quietly and silently.

The PTE are now in a very very tough position, over here (in Manc) following last years kick back, the PTE went out and spent a fortune on phase 3 - I don't think this will happen in Leeds - there is simply not the public appitite or political will to do this.

From what I have read (and been saying on various forums on this web site), I don't think Leeds had much of a chance after Jan 2004, that is when the price went wrong - of the 3 schemes cancelled last summer I full expect Manchester to be the only one to progress now (with Nottingham in the future).

Will be interesting to see what the PTE decide to do, will they now start to plan for buses, or restart the tram process - this will take years, if not decades (Oldham line nearly 30 years in planning now!!!).

I hope for a miracle in this sad story, but I fear we are at the very end of this tragic tale.

I have mixed views on that post.
1) There is a huge amount of support in Leeds for this scheme, and various organisations are fully backing it. The only person who isn't is Alistair Darling.
2) Alistair Darling has nothing to lose from this. Also the sooner we get rid of him, the better- he's awful.
3) The tram process is likely to start again because the rail network and bus network is as developed as it can get. New buses can be invested, but theres not enough staff to run any new routes. Trains are already running at the highest frequency possible on most lines, and nearly everywhere where lines can be built, they are built. Leeds could instead have a supertram, a monorail, an underground or a crossrail type system. But out of all these, supertram is by far the cheapest an easiest so if it doesnt get this what is it supposed to do instead? Its road network, busways/bus lanes and rail network can't get any more developed.

The Public are fully backing this and everyone is pushing for this, but no-one hears about it because the government- well Alistair Darling- doesn't want to know. Its times like these when I think everyone should start voting for the Green Party- we might actually get somewhere in the north.

How does he manage to ignore things like this?

Endorsements for Supertram
Supporting comments about Leeds SupertramJohn Bade, Centre Director, Victoria Quarter

Leeds is one of the largest retail centres in the UK employing more than 14,000 people, and already has a well-deserved reputation as one of the country’s top shopping destinations.

A recent study found that retailers are queuing up to open stores in the city - one hundred and sixty-four of them to be precise, it also revealed that trading conditions have improved significantly over the past year and we’re now rated the strongest of all 32 towns and cities reviewed in the study.

Supertram will enhance that reputation and, it is predicted, generate an extra annual city centre retail spend of over £130m. This of course means more jobs within the retail sector as well as a boost to local suppliers and the service industry sector.

Cllr David Blackburn, Green Group Leader, Leeds City Council

As Leeds’ continues to grow and prosper, it is our duty to ensure that this growth and prosperity is sustainable.

Supertram goes a long way toward meeting this need for sustainability in a number of ways. Firstly, while not entirely pollution free, the network will be powered from the National Grid, meaning it causes no direct, local air pollution.

And by significantly reducing the numbers of cars on the city’s roads, and the congestion they currently cause, it will also mean improved air quality in the city.

Supertram will also play a major role in regenerating communities, providing people with easy access to work and services and supporting local businesses, which can only benefit the city as a whole.

Cllr Peter Box, Leader of Wakefield Council

Fast, convenient and safe public transport like Supertram is an essential part of improving the quality of life and economy of the whole of West Yorkshire.

Adam Cairns, Director of Communications & Corporate Affairs, Leeds Teaching Hospitals

Leeds Supertram will pass by both Leeds General Infirmary and St James's Hospital providing people across the city with easy access to the wide range of health services available at the two sites, which can only have a positive impact on the health of the city's population.

Fast efficient public transport to both hospitals will also be convenient for people who are visiting friends and relatives, resulting in even fewer cars on the city's roads.

Cllr Andrew Carter, Conservative Group Leader, Leeds City Council

Transport accounts for about 15% of total business costs, which is why Supertram’s benefits, in terms of reducing traffic and improving connectivity, are so important to Leeds.

Across Europe, the majority of cities and regions with which Leeds competes have modern, efficient transport links in the form of tram or metro systems.

If Leeds is going to achieve its maximum potential as the economic driver for West Yorkshire and the region as a whole, it is most important we get the go-ahead to develop Supertram, which will give us these links.

Supertram will also be an important element in the regeneration of the City that and will give people from some of the most deprived wards, access to schools, jobs and services.

Paul Evans, Chief Executive Royal Armouries

The Royal Armouries on the south side of the river in Leeds has worked long and hard to bring much needed regeneration to this part of the city. It is around our museum that the huge development on the riverside is coming to fruition and the building of a spur of Supertram to this area of Leeds will open up access, not only for the museum, but also for the surrounding community.

The Royal Armouries are happy to support Metro's revised proposals for Supertram.

Maggie Gjessing, Harehills Neighbourhood Renewal Manager

Supertram will provide definite benefits for the Harehills area, giving local people better access to opportunities of employment and to services.

It will also provide a boost to local businesses while encouraging further regeneration in the area.

Cllr Mark Harris, Liberal Democrat Group Leader, Leeds City Council

I believe Supertram adds up for Leeds, West Yorkshire and Yorkshire & Humberside.

Leeds is now a major centre for retail, financial, legal and business services, design companies and manufacturing. It was recently announced regional winner of the Enterprising Britain competition which challenges towns and cities across the region to demonstrate that they can work in partnership to promote enterprise in their area and achieve positive results.

Spearheaded by John Prescott through the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, the Northern Way is a multi-million pound drive for urban renaissance aimed at creating jobs, sustainable communities and growth in the economy across the North.

One key aim, of the Northern Way is to decrease congestion on transport links, which threatens the region's competitiveness. The Northern Way Growth Strategy Report says, “In the North, our light rail systems have the potential to be the backbone of the public transport network.

“We consider the Leeds Supertram, Manchester Metrolink (phase 3 extension), Merseytram, the extensions to the Sheffield Supertram, the modernisation of the Tyne and Wear Metro as absolutely essential components of our strategies to strengthen the competitive advantage of our city regions."

Leeds Supertram, it adds up for the Northern Way.

Cllr Anne Hawkesworth, Bradford Council's Executive Member for the Environment The Supertram scheme is important to improving public transport and reducing road congestion in West Yorkshire. It also has the potential to strengthen existing links between Bradford and Leeds.

Gary Hetherington, Managing Director, Leeds Cricket, Football and Athletic Co Ltd

Our vision at Headingley is to provide the City with a venue to be proud of and Supertram is a vital part of this vision.

Paul Jagger, Regional Secretary, TUC

A high quality integrated public transport system, with Supertram at its heart is essential to generating more jobs in Leeds and bringing economic prosperity to the West Yorkshire region. I fully support the Leeds Supertram campaign and wish you all the best with the revised bid.

Cllr Stanley King, Chairman, Metro

As a Bradford man, I believe in Leeds Supertram because long, practical experience tells me that Leeds needs Supertram, and needs it now.

No other form of transport, good though it may be, can make the same impact, and the size of this city’s traffic problems makes Supertram not just desirable but essential if the life and commerce of the area is not going to be stifled and its traffic brought to a halt.

Supertram will work in Stourton, in Harehills Road, in Easterly Road and Headingley, and is the best prescription for Leeds’ blocked arteries.

Professor Simon Lee, Vice Chancellor, Leeds Metropolitan University and Professor Michael Arthur, Vice Chancellor, University of Leeds

With two internationally acclaimed universities, Leeds has become the most popular university choice in the country and has a growing student population of over 100,000.

At present most students need to live within walking distance of the universities but Supertram would provide fast, cheap and easy links around the city allowing greater choice of accommodation and simple access between the various university sites.

Supertram will also add capacity to the public transport network in the area of the universities, easing the situation of crowded buses in the area, which we currently experience.

Leeds Council of Youth

The Leeds Youth Council Transport Policy Group would like to voice their support for the Leeds Supertram. They group recognises how Supertram will greatly benefit the City by providing fast, frequent, safe and efficient transport while at the same time combatting congestion and reducing pollution.

Supertram will also bring jobs to areas that need regeneration and will boost tourism.

Leeds MPs

We are giving full backing to the Supertram scheme, because we realise the benefits it will bring not only to the communities along the scheme’s routes, but also to the city as a whole.

We want to see Leeds benefiting from the jobs, links and prosperity the scheme will bring. We also feel Supertram is a major catalyst for regeneration.

Supertram will initially run through some of our constituencies, meaning our constituents will benefit directly from it. Others of us are keen to see the initial stage of the network underway, so that we can start planning further routes. These will create links to other parts of the city, and other parts of the region including to the west of Leeds, Bradford and Leeds Bradford International Airport.

Supertram is a clean, fast and efficient means of dealing with the increasing levels of traffic and congestion that Leeds faces. As Leeds MPs, we want as many people across this city and beyond to feel the many benefits it can bring.


Cllr Mick Lyons, Shadow Chair of Metro

As former Chair of West Yorkshire Passenger Transport Authority, I am well aware of the benefits Supertram will bring to Leeds and am 100% behind the scheme.

I have always seen getting the go-ahead for Supertram in Leeds as the first stage of developing a wider network of fast accessible transport that reaches out across West Yorkshire.

Gary Moran, General Manager, Leeds Marriott Hotel

Leeds is one of the UK’s leading destinations for short breaks, city breaks, day trips and for conference travellers, attracting millions of visitors every year. Tourism in Leeds supports more than 20,000 full time jobs and brings nearly £735m into the local economy each year. Visitors tell us they come to Leeds for the shopping, for the growing continental-style café culture and the nightlife.

Supertram may not make a great difference to the way people enjoy these aspects of the city, but the overall boost in image that it will give to the city, making it more like one of the continental European cities it competes with as a destination, is an important one.

Having a Supertram will help Leeds to compete with places like Lyons, Strasbourg and Prague, which can be reached relatively cheaply but all have integrated tram or metro systems.

Sally Morgan, Chair of Supertram Access Group

We fully support the provision of a Light Rapid Transit system as a truly accessible system that is likely to remain accessible for many years. With this in mind, on behalf of all disabled people in Leeds, currently and in the future, and on behalf of all other people who would benefit from a tram system we urge you to support the project.

Tom Morton, Leeds Chamber of Commerce

Leeds has been voted Britain’s best city for business, and is the financial capital of the North with one of the fastest growing economies in the UK. Its main strengths are in financial and legal services, but its retail and media sectors are also very strong and the city is the UK’s third major manufacturing centre.

Its total GDP stands at over £10 billion per year, with 30% growth predicted over the next ten years, compared with a UK average of 23%.

And around £2.3 billion has been invested in major property development schemes over the last ten years and a further £3.3 billion is in the pipeline.

Leeds is, consequently, the largest employment centre in the region with another 32,000 jobs forecast to be created in Leeds over the next 10 years.

Seventy percent of those new jobs are likely to be filled from outside Leeds, and we urgently need a quick, efficient means of getting these people into and out of the city.

Without that means, in the form of Supertram, we will face paying the price of our own success, facing the costs of increasing congestion and the pollution that goes with it.

Supertram is essential for the sustainable development of our economy and our city.

Cllr Greg Mulholland, Leeds spokesperson for Metro

I consider Supertram as the transport system of the future, vital to meeting the needs of Leeds people and welcome the all-party support that has been given to this revised bid.

I hope that the innovative and constructive solution that Leeds is putting forward will be given proper consideration and that the city will be able to progress to the next stage of the scheme without further delay.

Frank O'Malley, Business Coordinator, Leeds Play Network

Leeds Play Network is happy to support the Supertram proposals. The single most significant factor limiting children's opportunities to play is danger from traffic so we are happy to support any proposal that will reduce the number of car journeys.

As part of a comprehensive Public Transport plan the Supertram has a vital role to play in providing safe, affordable travel to a range of play opportunities for all the children of the city.

John Packer, Bishop of Ripon and Leeds

I believe the Supertram is an important element in the regeneration of the City in general and of its most deprived areas in particular.

It will enable people to get to schools, jobs and shops and is amongst the most crucial elements of the development of our City.

Cllr Kath Pinnock, Leader of Kirklees Council

Kirklees welcomes this opportunity to support the Supertram concept. It is essential that a vibrant and economically buoyant Leeds and West Yorkshire has a modern 21st century integrated public transport system.

Fast, attractive and efficient public transport is absolutely vital both in commercial and competitive terms in attracting people to our towns and cities, and it has environmental importance in encouraging people to use public transport.

It is essential for the prosperity of the region that the Supertram becomes a reality. In time we would be urging that the Supertram becomes a West Yorkshire-wide system, and in particular creates a link to Dewsbury and Birstall.

Chris Russell, Deputy Regional Secretary, Transport & General Workers' Union

The Transport and General Workers' Union represents the overwhelming majority of transport workers in Leeds and considers the provision of the Supertram network to be essential for the sustainability of economic growth in Leeds.

An integrated comprehensive public transport system will be advantageous for both the public and private sectors, for employers and employees, for producers and consumers, and for the citizens and visitors.

Doug Sandle - Chair of Leeds Arts

The proposed Leeds Supertram will make a significant contribution to the arts in Leeds by providing essential, safe and convenient access to the city centre and by providing a link among its main cultural facilities and activities.

The Leeds Supertram also provides opportunities for its own programme of creative and cultural activities that can contribute to both its physical presence and to the involvement of local communities. The Supertram proposal in acknowledging those opportunities, (including the potential attraction of further funding for the use of arts in regeneration), will significantly contribute to the growing impact of the arts on the economic, social and environmental well-being of Leeds and its region.

Martin Schweiger, Consultant in Public Health, Leeds Health Authority

By reducing the number of car miles on Leeds’ roads by as much as 40 million miles, Supertram can only have a beneficial effect on people’s health in the city.

The NHS currently spends £11bn a year fighting pollution-based disease. Asthma is the most common chronic illness in childhood. As many as one in eight of our children are currently being treated for asthma symptoms with one in five diagnosed with asthma at some point and fatalities in children are rising alarmingly.

My colleagues and I would therefore welcome the introduction of a cleaner form of transport like Supertram that will remove a significant proportion of the pollution from car exhausts that can cause or aggravate asthma and a whole range of diseases and allergies.

By reducing the number of vehicles on the road, Supertram will also contribute to a reduction in road traffic accidents and make streets more accessible, which means more people will feel encouraged to walk. A reduction in noise pollution is another real benefit.

Supertram will also contribute to regeneration in some of the city’s poorest wards and improve people’s access to jobs and services, including the city’s two hospitals, which will also have a positive knock on effect on health.

Jon Trickett MP

Supertram was always a key issue for Leeds during my seven years as Leader of Leeds City Council and I’m fully aware of the project’s value to the whole region, including my own Hemsworth constituency.

Since becoming an MP I have kept up to speed with developments on Supertram and have been briefed on what Leeds has done to put together this revised bid.

It makes the case for Leeds Supertram clearly, in terms of the benefits it will bring, value for money and bottom-line costs, and sets out a model that could be followed for the development of tram systems not only in Leeds, but in other cities up and down the country.

Cllr Keith Wakefield,, Former Leader Leeds City Council

As Leader of Leeds City Council up until June, I have been very much involved with the project and need no convincing of its value for Leeds.

Leeds has been described as a two-speed city, it has excellent examples of growth and prosperity but it also has ten of the most deprived wards in the UK.

Supertram will provide vital links for six of these wards and will make a massive difference to the future for the people living in those wards. The access to job opportunities, to education and training, to health services, shops and leisure that Supertram will provide will achieve an enormous amount in terms of social inclusion.

And it is only when we have ensured we are creating opportunities for everyone in our city that we can claim it is a true success.

Barbara Woroncow OBE, Deputy Chair, Leeds Cultural Partnership

A well-designed Supertram system is very important for Leeds, not only as a means to assist tourist visitors, but also to facilitate access for local residents to the many cultural and sporting facilities and events that take place across the whole city

If Darling says nothing tomorrow - which appears to be the case - this is dead, dead as a dead do-do.

This is not good news, not good at all, he is basically leaving it to die quietly and silently.

The PTE are now in a very very tough position, over here (in Manc) following last years kick back, the PTE went out and spent a fortune on phase 3 - I don't think this will happen in Leeds - there is simply not the public appitite or political will to do this.

From what I have read (and been saying on various forums on this web site), I don't think Leeds had much of a chance after Jan 2004, that is when the price went wrong - of the 3 schemes cancelled last summer I full expect Manchester to be the only one to progress now (with Nottingham in the future).

Will be interesting to see what the PTE decide to do, will they now start to plan for buses, or restart the tram process - this will take years, if not decades (Oldham line nearly 30 years in planning now!!!).

I hope for a miracle in this sad story, but I fear we are at the very end of this tragic tale.
Thats what it looks like Trammy - turning down by silence.

As you will have read earlier, I think this scheme will fail, unfourtanetley. I hate to think like that- I'm usually quite optomistic. Not on this issue. If this scheme really doesnt get anywhere do you think Leeds could consider an ULTra network- it would not provide as much integration to a large demand due to the high population as a tram I would guess, but it might be alot more viable.
http://www.atsltd.co.uk/ it is cheaper and has been tested, except as I say, alot of cars would be needed to cope with the deman I would expect. Maybe it could be trialled in one part of Leeds, possibly the riverside or linking the bus and rail stations?

It is only a suggestion. I would think a supertram would provide a stronger, cheaper (as in ticket pricing) and much more supported infrastructure if it went ahead, I admit.

Well if these Tram schemes do get silently rejected, in places like Leed's and Liverpool, we will have to silently vote for the opposition at the next opportunity. There also needs to be a better way than seeing projects like these forever sinking in years of delay and inflating costs. Going at this rate it wil cost £10billion pound just to build an inch of tram network anywhere in the U.K. :bash:

Does Darling dye those eyebrows jet black or what. :runaway:

Jux, the Liverpool rejection was hardly silent, Darling went on all the local media in Liverpool a couple of weeks ago following his announcement.



Leeds people, what would your prefered choice be now?

Would you like the PTE to continue the fight, maybe just try to get funding for one line at a time?

Would you want the PTE to try and get guided bus lanes?

Go for congestion charging to pay for the network?

Leave it as it is and see what happens nationally over the next 10 years?

Try some unusual technology - as is being suggested by H No1?

Would you want the PTE to try and get guided bus lanes?
NOooo!


They are awful... the most stupid looking ugly cheap and nasty concept anyone could think of!!!!!!!!!!!





One line would be better than none... and buld up.


Re-opening sations on existing lines would do the city great favours... I can never undersand why this is supposedly so costy though...

Just normal bus routes would be fine too....



.... I do wonder sometimes why things the Victorians managed so easily we struggle to get done... :(

To be honest, my hope is that the likes of Liverpool and Leeds continue on their quest to get tram lines built, maybe altering the plans to one line at a time.

This will take a very very long time though - unless the DfT get their finger out and sort out the entire process of getting these things done.

I agree with Molly - let's just have better (if ordinary) bus services. Give WYPTE greater regulatory powers to keep the bus companies in check and (in my opinion) make prepaid ticketing compulsory and interchangeable. Drivers should not have to handle money. I am lucky in that where I live bus services are good (they include possibly the best bus service in Leeds - the no. 36 - which is NOT run by Firstbus). Yesterday went on another bus route from Meanwood. Scruffy drivers, boneshaker noisy old buses, made the experience less than pleasant. I suspect this is what most bus users in Leeds have to endure.

Fred - I take it you use the buses a lot?

Do you think that improving the bus services would be capable of attracting people out of their cars?

Do you think Leeds has a traffic problem to the extent that progress is being stopped due to congestion in the centre of Leeds at the moment?

make prepaid ticketing compulsory and interchangeable. Drivers should not have to handle money.
Yes... we lived in a while Bradford before moving here and I loved the Bradford Kerchingers. It saves time and is very convenient.


What I hate about the busses.

Lack of bus lanes.. this makes the buses unreliable... they must be faster than the car to make it worth while for people to use them.

They are not very clean... the car you can and keep it nice... so to attract people the bus must have a clean too. I recently encouraged a group of friends( mostly retired ) to come into Leeds on the bus... so they did... I was amaze they never use the buses and our route is good and the bus was okay.... but to them it was disgusting... okay... it was raining and buses stick when it rains... but I think they don't use the bus again. They like the comfort of their cars.

What I like now about the busses.... well I like dogs being free... that is good.

But I don't like the kids travel passes because at 11 an 12 they loose these and keep having to pay full price... So for a family of 4 to take an off peak trip into town is £8 and that is way too much.... even £6 is too much because this means using the car is cheaper.


I think compared to London we have no traffic problem at the moment... and in a city at peak time no one expects to get up to fast speeds. Travelling in peak time in a car takes time.... but you can do it and it is made more attractive because public transport really isn't any quicker. Public transport is way too slow.


We are ourselves as a family are great believers of walking or using public transport and so over time we loose hours of our life to using it because this is good or the environment... but it bugs me to see our support and sacrifice over the years is not being supported by the government.

What I hate about the busses.

Lack of bus lanes.. this makes the buses unreliable... they must be faster than the car to make it worth while for people to use them.

They are not very clean... the car you can and keep it nice... so to attract people the bus must have a clean too. I recently encouraged a group of friends( mostly retired ) to come into Leeds on the bus... so they did... I was amaze they never use the buses and our route is good and the bus was okay.... but to them it was disgusting... okay... it was raining and buses stick when it rains... but I think they don't use the bus again. They like the comfort of their cars.



I think this is where trams come into their own - they are seen as clean, fast and reliable. They are often seen, especially by older people, as a good alternative to the car from my experience.

These are some of the reasons I think I'd prefer WYPTE to progress the tram route, no matter how long this takes.

Fred - I take it you use the buses a lot?

Do you think that improving the bus services would be capable of attracting people out of their cars?

Do you think Leeds has a traffic problem to the extent that progress is being stopped due to congestion in the centre of Leeds at the moment?


Hardly ever used buses until I retired, since when I have made frequent use of my bus pass (free from next year !). Am not qualified to compare Leeds's congestion with that of other cities. Have always thought that to tackle the problem both carrot and stick are necessary. Without the latter most drivers would definitely not forsake their cars. No public transport can compete in terms of creating one's own comfortable travelling environment and convenience like a car. Having supertram is not the complete answer as even you, TRAMMY, must admit. For example if it were up and running in Leeds it would not affect where I live - even with the three lines as proposed (nor does it cover most of Manchester). In theory, don't understand why buses should be any less clean than trams. A lot of improvements could be made to buses to make them more efficient and attractive - though there is a certain romance about railed transport like trams and trains which buses never seem to evoke. :)

Well Leeds already has bus lanes, and they're kinda a waste of money. Especially on the A61 which is a dual carriageway and never gets really congested.

Well the only party which would ensure this scheme goes ahead is probably the green party, and I don't think we'd do any better with LD/Tory.

If there were to be one line at a time proposed, then which one?- they're all as important as each other.

What do you think they will do? I suppose more important than what we want them to do, is what they actually will do.

Well Leeds already has bus lanes, and they're kinda a waste of money. Especially on the A61 which is a dual carriageway and never gets really congested.
Many bus routs have bottle-necks which render bus routs useless... they work on the stretches of roads where there is no congestion but where there is congestion their is no bus lane. But short of knocking down building to make space at these points maybe there is no solution. This is why the old trains stations should be opened up... and whoever shut them don should die a slow and painful death.... :yes:


I think also that although more people do need to be encouraged to use public transport ... the system we have now can not cope with the uptake so in peak times buses and trains are over full as it is.... so something is needed...


...and after too many years of talk it is insane that the supertram isn't already well on it's way. The only problem with the proposed system was it didn't reach into enough areas... but once it was up and running I'm sure it would be extended. It should be seen as an invesrment into the future prospects of the city. It will attract and maintain investment in the city and it is short sighted not to get on and buld this for us.

So Molly, now that trams look unlikey to happen as was planned, what do you think should happen, and what do you think will happen?

I'm tempted to suggerst we have a good cry.... but maybe that isn't very helpful. ;)



... so a few drinks... :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:

( that's a little more helpful :) )

... and then push on stubbornly for our trams.... I think it s better to wait than waste funding on some low level embarasment of a compromise. But the tram is worth fighting for and worth waiting for... even if it is a scaled down version or scaled into small over a long time development span. ... but maybe it is a shame London is to host the Olympics because this is a high price to pay. I think we all knew really that if they won the bid we would loose the tram. ( :grump moan: )

Molly, think you are blaming a bit much on the Olympics, the scheme was in trouble ever since Jan 2004 when it was apparent that not enough money was availble for the planned work.

I only hope the people that matter have similar attitudes to yourself, and want to keep on fighting for the trams.

It doesn't hurt to blame London Olympics... people round here like to do that you know! :yes:

... but better the Londoners won than the French! :nocrook:


If ...like young Mr Fred says.... the tram network was aimed at reaching more areas of the city ( like mine and his ) it would have huge all city support.... I was quite disappointed when I saw the plans... but I still hoped it would reach us one day for the convenience of being able to use it and also to put more value on my house. Like I say it is good for investment and regeneration of parts of the city to have the trams as well as it being a very cool and attactive and needed method of tansport.

Evening Post Story:

Dead in its tracks
Anger as Darling sounds the death knell for Supertram
By Paul Robinson and Anne Alexander
LEEDS was united in anger today after Transport Secretary Alistair Darling sounded the death knell for the city's Supertram dream.
Civic leaders had urged Mr Darling to decide the long-delayed project's fate before Parliament's summer recess.
But today's deadline looked set to come and go without any word from the minister or his department on whether the Government will fund the £500m light rail network.
That failure to make an announcement effectively signalled the end of the line for the scheme – and drew a furious reaction from politicians and business leaders.
Fabian Hamilton, Labour MP for Leeds North East, said: "I can't believe we are being asked to keep on waiting like this. It is, quite simply, unacceptable."
Referring to Mr Darling's support for London's £15bn Crossrail scheme, Mr Hamilton said: "It seems that the capital is the only place that matters when it comes to transport."
Frustration
Greg Mulholland, Liberal Democrat MP for Leeds North West, yesterday hand delivered a letter to the minister expressing his frustration at Whitehall's silence on Supertram.
He told the YEP: "People feel that they have been fobbed off."
City council leader Mark Harris branded the Government's treatment of Leeds "disgraceful."
He said: "This reflects a lack of any clear policy on transport or on the development of the cities and regions outside London and the south east."
Criticism also came from deputy council leader Andrew Carter; Ian Williams, policy director at Leeds Chamber of Commerce, and Karam Hussain, chairman of West Yorkshire transport supervisory body Metro .
Leeds has spent more than 15 years and £40m of taxpayers' cash trying to get the go-ahead for Supertram. Mr Darling rejected the original bid last year after costs spiralled out of control to £700m, with the Government having originally pledged £355m.
After the latest bid for support was submitted to the Government in November, Tony McNulty, then a Transport Minister, said a decision would be made "at the earliest opportunity."
But now that the Commons has risen for its summer break, an announcement is unlikely before MPs return in October. A thumbs-up at that stage would be too late for Leeds, however.
Compulsory purchase powers relating to around 120 pockets of land along the network's proposed route run out in March next year, and the acquisitions must start by September if the job is to be done on time.
If the powers are allowed to lapse, the city would have to go through a public works inquiry to regain them. That could take years and cost millions of pounds.
A spokesman for the Department for Transport said it was possible an announcement could be made while Parliament was in recess.
The light rail system would have served Whinmoor in the east, Lawnswood in the north and Hunslet in the south of the city.
paul.robinsons@ypn.co.uk
21 July 2005

Well done to the two journalists (Paul Robinson and Anne Alexander) who have taken this up. Interesting that the DfT spokesman said that an announcement could be made whilst in recess. A large noise is needed in the meantime, and the more support from the press the better. I will say again, this money (c£300m at least) will go to another city if Leeds does not get the tram

The trams are dead, the end.

this again shows the total and utter contempt for leeds this is a fuckin disgracenothin less. with out the trams or any other viable public transport system in leeds it will be 5 to 10 years before companies will no longer look at leeds to place there offices in because of the incresed rush hours, thanks for that like i say idependence to yorkshire london can kiss my tyke ass!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 :bash: :bash: :bash: :bash:

Well it only wasted millions of tax payers money and huge amounts of man hours (compared to billions of tax payers money and massive amounts of man hours on London projects).

Alistair Darling should be shot.

The trams are dead, the end.
Not certain now. If the DfT say an announcement could be made during recess, then surely they are the only ones that count? I would be suprised if it fell without ANY comment from the Department. Liverpool had plenty of comment from AD as noted. However there should have been DfT comment earlier to say this was the case, and we need a timetable. It can't just be left hanging (if I can use that phrase).

Also, Yorkshire Forward have gone very quiet on this. They need to be lobbying hard at the moment.

Keep dreaming Lioner - if the government were going to say yes to this, they would have done ages ago - Darling would have tried to get as much good publicity as possible from it.

This is going to die quietly over the summer.

Not certain now. If the DfT say an announcement could be made during recess, then surely they are the only ones that count? I would be suprised if it fell without ANY comment from the Department. Liverpool had plenty of comment from AD as noted. However there should have been DfT comment earlier to say this was the case, and we need a timetable. It can't just be left hanging (if I can use that phrase).

Also, Yorkshire Forward have gone very quiet on this. They need to be lobbying hard at the moment.
Today's Yorkshire Evening Post seems to think its dead, with the bold headline "Dead in its tracks - Anger as Darling sounds the death knell for Supertram" on Page 2, and the first passage "Leeds was united in anger today after Transport Secretary Alistair Darling sounded the death knell for the city's Supertram dream"

In the short term, could some bus routes following where the tram lines would be, get replaced with streetcars- those things like buses. The fisrt start in early 2006 in York. http://www.wright-group.co.uk/streetcar/streetcar.pdf

They have a tram look, and inside are like trams. They are also quiet and low emission. It still really is a bus, but its the best next thing. They could easily be put on other routes once Leeds gets its supertram or equivalent which will happen, even if it isnt soon- it has to happen.

Do you think that if Metro and Yorkshire Forward put a sum of money into the scheme (if I'm not mistaken, they were going to do that anyway?) and if congestion charging was introduced into Leeds along with as many money making strategies as possible were introduced into Leeds, the money could be raised for supertram, or alternativeley subsidized fully and the money earned back through these?

There is a side benefit of the failure to get the tram, it means that city centre living will certainly continue to boom at a higher level than it would have done if the transport showed signs of improving. That's good for us skyscraper fans as at the end of the day we will see more schemes built. This comment was made by city leaders when the congestion charging debate raised its ugly head.

I am of course very dissapointed in what has gone on with the supertram, and only hope Alastair's department listen to the comments and make a special decision during recess (can't see it happening though).

I am of course very dissapointed in what has gone on with the supertram, and only hope Alastair's department listen to the comments and make a special decision during recess (can't see it happening though).
Transport minister Derek Twigg is willing to work for the next 3 weeks to work on the Merseytram proposal. There is a major time constraint on Merseytram what with construction needs to start within 3 weeks to be complete before 2008. So someone is still working in Parliament for Tram schemes. Don't give up hope just yet.

See news article here (http://icliverpool.icnetwork.co.uk/0100news/0100regionalnews/tm_objectid=15763573%26method=full%26siteid=50061%26headline=will%2dthis%2dtram%2dbe%2drunning%2din%2dcity%2dstreets%2din%2d2008%2d-name_page.html)

Today's Yorkshire Evening Post seems to think its dead, with the bold headline "Dead in its tracks
lol! Well they would! They are always so notoriously positive and cheerful!

lol! Well they would! They are always so notoriously positive and cheerful!

Not quite fair, Molly. Au contraire, the YEP usually follows the line of most hype in favour of Leeds - but that's OK, it is a local paper after all.

Regarding supertram the writing was on the wall as early as October 2003 when I wrote to the YEP as follows (it was not printed):-

" According to an article in The Times on Friday 8th October by its transport correspondent (repeated in summary form the following day) the government has lost faith in tram schemes and is to abandon those already approved - including Leeds Supertram.

If true, this would be a shattering blow to Leeds and its attempt to tackle its traffic problems, especially in view of the frustrating decade of inability to get government finance followed since then by the years of detailed planning which has gone into the proposed scheme (and the commencement of some of the preparatory work) as described in your article.

I have contacted WYPTA about the ' Times' report, but it claims to have no knowledge of the reported government decision and doubts that it is true. Meanwhile the writer of The Times article stands by the veracity of his report and we must therefore await an official government announcement either way.

There now, to me, seems little prospect of getting a tram system in Leeds, and that it is now back to the drawing boaIs in the effort to tackle its growing traffic problems !"

As I wrote at the subsequently to the Chair of WYPTA, "Is there a plan B?"

In general, I don't see that much of a traffic problem, or at least not compared to London. I think though that there is alot of cars which don't need to be on the road, if only the transport was there in replace, aka the supertram. For the long term development of Leeds, this is important, hopefully for the next 5 years the dual carriageways and motorways will be able to cope. Whats happening with the Eat Leeds Link Road anyway? When should that be opening? Alot of traffic can be diverted to use that instead of the A64 if they are coming off the A1(M) from the north.

Oh Darling I...
...I can't bear it any longer.
(in the voice of Celia Johnson) ;)

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/38935000/jpg/_38935693_tram203.jpg

Minister asked for tram decision

Metro says Supertram is needed to relieve Leeds's traffic problems
A delegation from Leeds is in London on Tuesday to discuss the city's delayed Supertram scheme.
City council leaders Mark Harris and Andrew Carter, along with Metro chairman Karam Hussain, are seeing transport minister Derek Twigg.

They will be asking why the government has still not come to a decision on whether the tram system can go ahead.

Ministers rejected the original tram scheme as too expensive and are now considering a cheaper alternative.

Land for tracks

Metro, which is in charge of public transport in West Yorkshire, says if Supertram is to be a built, an early decision is needed from the government.

This is because powers Metro has to buy the land needed for the tracks will expire next spring.

"Mr Twigg has confirmed that he appreciates the time constraints we face and we welcome the fact that he has stayed on into the summer recess to meet us and consider the scheme," said Councillor Harris.

"On Tuesday we will be asking for a clear explanation of why, when the Department for Transport has confirmed that Leeds has supplied all the additional information requested, a decision has not been made."

Councillor Hussain added: "Mr Twigg needs to know that Supertram has support from all quarters and has been called vital for the ongoing growth and prosperity of Leeds and West Yorkshire by local business leaders."

Metro wants the government to fund 75% of the £355m costs of the revised scheme.

Three Supertram routes are planned, running into the east, south and north of Leeds.

In general, I don't see that much of a traffic problem.

You're joking aren't you? Try getting into or out of Leeds at rush hour! I'm guessing that you usually come into Leeds at off peak times when congestion isn't too bad, that's not a true representation of how bad the traffic situation is in Leeds.

You're joking aren't you? Try getting into or out of Leeds at rush hour! I'm guessing that you usually come into Leeds at off peak times when congestion isn't too bad, that's not a true representation of how bad the traffic situation is in Leeds.
Why would anyone attempt to drive into a city centre like Leeds in rush hour????? I find that very selfish. Perhaps a congestion charge is needed which could conveniently help pay for the tram.

Well I usually get the train now, but I have often been around Leeds at rush hour. I notice alot of traffic on the city centre loop and quite busy on the ring roads and some of the major routes, but I find that the dual carriageways out of Leeds City Centre tend to be quite free flowing, although busy. I don't think I've been on roads like the A58, A64, A660, A65 at rush hour. The A61 doesnt seem to get congested that much, or the A653. The point was in comparison to London anyway. Most cities in the UK tend to have traffic problems now anyway...

Why would anyone attempt to drive into a city centre like Leeds in rush hour????? I find that very selfish. Perhaps a congestion charge is needed which could conveniently help pay for the tram.

Er, possibly in order to get to work?!? What an absolutely ridiculous thing to say! Do you live in Leeds, or visit it regularly? If not why make sweeping comments on something you know little about?

Leeds has an appalling public transport system and introducing a congestion charge before improving public transport is putting the cart before the horse.

Er, possibly in order to get to work?!? What an absolutely ridiculous thing to say! Do you live in Leeds, or visit it regularly? If not why make sweeping comments on something you know little about?

Leeds has an appalling public transport system and introducing a congestion charge before improving public transport is putting the cart before the horse.Er, how about a walking, cycling, taking a bus or a train? Yes I have been to Leeds several times and got around without a car.

Introducing a congestion charge before building a tram line would not be cart before horse as instantly busses move quicker and more effectively thereby increasing their frequency. Your argument is a carbon copy of that used by those opposing the c charge in London who have since been proved wrong. I hope the supertram goes ahead though, I fully support that.

What annoys me are people that clog up our roads because they are too lazy. Driving the same route as a bus for example or making vital 1/2 mile journeys to pick up a pint of milk during the rush hour. Sure it is more comfortable in the car, but what about the rest of the community? I recognised this self centred attitude and felt I had to comment. All we do in this country is rant on about our rights and don't for a minute think how we could contribute to a better world. It is because of these people our roads are full - not some inept politican or bias against Leeds.

Er, how about a walking, cycling, taking a bus or a train? Yes I have been to Leeds several times and got around without a car.

Introducing a congestion charge before building a tram line would not be cart before horse as instantly busses move quicker and more effectively thereby increasing their frequency. Your argument is a carbon copy of that used by those opposing the c charge in London who have since been proved wrong. I hope the supertram goes ahead though, I fully support that.

What annoys me are people that clog up our roads because they are too lazy. Driving the same route as a bus for example or making vital 1/2 mile journeys to pick up a pint of milk during the rush hour. Sure it is more comfortable in the car, but what about the rest of the community? I recognised this self centred attitude and felt I had to comment. All we do in this country is rant on about our rights and don't for a minute think how we could contribute to a better world. It is because of these people our roads are full - not some inept politican or bias against Leeds.

Leeds is not London. The congenstion charge works in London as there was already a well established if underfunded public transport system of tube and buses. Leeds has a bus system only and a rather poor one at that unless you live on one of the major routes.

As you will see from my location sig, I currently work in Portsmouth where I am fortunate enough to be able to cycle into work as I am a keen cyclist. I am working back home in Leeds next week when I will also be able to cycle along the canal tow path or take a bus as I live on a major bus line. However what about the people who are not on a major bus line or work too far away to be able to cycle. How do you propose that they get into the centre of Leeds without using their car? Saying that people commuting by car are lazy is generalising and a knee jerk reaction.

I am not opposed to congenstion charging, however there must be an alternative efficient method of getting around in order to get people out of the car. This could perhaps be funded by capitalising against future revenues of the congenstion charging.

I am not saying that the alternative need be the supertram, indeed I feel that a dramatically improved bus service could be a more viable opetion, but it is imperative to have this in place prior to congestion charging.

I think that a series of different measures needs to be looked at in order to combat certain different circumstances. These need to be addressed not only by the council/government but by local businesses/schools/groups etc...

For example, where I live in Horsforth (just outside of Leeds for those of you that don't come from this area) it is noticably quieter on the roads during the school holidays and I'm sure that is the case up and down the country as it seems to be a common 'saying'. Surely a community/council funded school bus facility for these schools would take many cars off the road during such a busy time? (or something to that effect).

Please don't think I'm just isolating just the parents. I too am guilty, as I drive 3 miles to work from home and am also aware of many others that make the same trip to my work but we all arrive (at similar times) seperately in different cars. Perhaps companies could do more to organise car share schemes?

So, Trams, yes please, congestion charges? Maybe. But we all have a responsibilty to ease congestion and we can all make a difference.

:soapbox:



Sorry, I'll stand down now.... :runaway:

I watched Look North earlier, and someone was interviewed about the supertram. There was no mention of congestion charing... You can probably watch it on the Look North site.

I'm sorry but if anyone is saying that people aren't biased to London then thats ridiculous now. After todays meeting, Mr. Twigg said that Leeds should consider a guided busway, and basically supertram seems to look further away than ever. Well thats a stupid thing to say, a guided busway won't change things much, and Leeds already has guided busways which are a load of crap. If he thinks that Leeds Supertram is too expensive he should look at crossrail! Why don't they build a guided busway there- well its London. Its not good enoguh for London- well why does Leeds have to put up with it- its a clear sign of a bias towards London, which has gone too far. The current transport system is as developed as its gonna get in Leeds without a new mode like supertram, and most cities outside London.

Minister requests more work..

..to be complete by September.

Following the meeting on 26 July between Leeds Council leader, Councillor Mark Harris and Metro Chairman Councillor Karam Hussain with Transport Minister Derek Twigg to discuss the scheme’s future, the Minister has asked the Supertram team to complete further work in connection with local funding.

The team has also been asked to participate in joint work with the Department for Transport to review all alternative options. This work will be carried out with the Department for Transport during the parliamentary summer recess in order to be complete by September in time to meet the deadlines necessary for the start of land acquisition for the project.

“I am deeply disappointed that at this stage the transport minister was still not able to give us the go ahead for Supertram and in fact asked us to consider alternative proposals’, said Councillor Harris, ‘however Mr Twigg clearly understands the tight time constraints now facing the scheme and his department will be working with us over the summer recess to ensure that this latest work is completed by September”.

“It is regrettable that a positive decision was not forthcoming today, we have ensured that Mr Twigg is fully aware of the importance of Supertram to the long term development and prosperity of Leeds and the sub region and we will be working with the Department for Transport to have the additional work complete by September,” said Councillor Karam Hussain.

Doesn't sound very hopeful, does it?

Better than nothing I guess. I've got a bit more hope now.

What they're really saying is 'we suggest you consider a cheaper option like a guided bus way network (which is already in place in some areas) so we can have more money for London. I would suggest someone saying that to Mr. Twigg and Alistair Darling 'We consider London should consider cheaper options like a guided busway network so Leeds and the other cities wanting imrpovements can get them'. I'm sure no route in London is any more busy than any other cities main routes because London has transport to take people off the roads.

I find it appaling that Leeds has been treated like this despite Leeds has presented such a good case and made it clear that Leeds really does need this now, emphasizing the need. It is not acceptable that other cities are forgotten almost, while London is showered in money. Its a wonder that Leeds has managed to become so succesful when its had such little funding.

http://www.leedstoday.net/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=39&ArticleID=1095752

Looks like congestion charging in Leeds is more realistic than we first believed. There's a little bit about supertram in there aswell.

As much as this has been very negative recently, we should not be too down. Until they say 'no' Leeds still has a chance.

I would like to think that the council has enough of an enterprise mindset (and balls) to keep this alive even if the governemnt says no. They do have options such as conjestion charging, selling the airport and inviting a private enterprise in to get involved. If every tram had and shelter was the Virgin Supertram for instance.

We should wait and see.

So the YEP is suggesting that the Tram maybe laid as bait for Leeds to trial the congestion charges?

I don't know what you guys think but I see this as a forgone conclusion within the next 20 years anyway so lets take the bait if given the opportunity. After all if we dig our heels in and say no then we could end up with the congestion charges anyway and no tram. I hope we don't cut off our nose to spite our face on this issue.

Application 20/43/05/FU
Received on 31/01/2005

Description
variation of condition no 1 of deemed planning consent for north and east supertram (extension of time limit)
Location
BODINGTON TO PARK ROW AND GRIMES DYKE TO PARK ROW LEEDS MAJ
Library
Holt Park
Decision Permission Granted Decision Date 25/07/2005

Application 20/43/05/FU
Received on 31/01/2005

Description
variation of condition no 1 of deemed planning consent for north and east supertram (extension of time limit)
Location
BODINGTON TO PARK ROW AND GRIMES DYKE TO PARK ROW LEEDS MAJ
Library
Holt Park
Decision Permission Granted Decision Date 25/07/2005



I don't understand this decision in the light of everything which has been said this week

I don't understand this decision in the light of everything which has been said this week
I suppose they've made this decision in the vain hope that miracles do happen, and something positive happens in or by September regarding Supertram - which I very much doubt, or that it has been truncated further to two lines.

maybe something's been said we havent heard about? Or maybe they're giving planning permission in order to move it along as quickly as possible....

Surely you don't judge the merits of a planning application on its likelihood of actually happenning?

It looks to me like the planning department have extended the time limit on the compulsory purchase orders?

Yeah so do I. Ive contacted Leeds Supetram and Leeds City Council- lets see what I get back in reply.

It looks to me like the planning department have extended the time limit on the compulsory purchase orders?

I think that they have just extended the Planning Permission rather than the CPO deadline, which would be a separate process. I have a feeling that they did this a while back with the southern Line.

If the supertram doesnt come to Leeds, what do you think to major improvements on the rail network in Leeds including reopening of some lines to get a network similar to the tyne and wear metro? This could serve most areas of Leeds. The only thing is, is 1 supertram line would still be needed for the north east of Leeds.
It would use seperate distinctive trains which would be a seperate network from the railway except would have to share the rail line in some areas. An extension to the airport could be incorporated, and a stop at the White Rose Centre, Elland Road and other landmarks.

One off the esteemed Leeds contributors claimed on another thread that Leeds politicians had done as much as was possible to get Supertram back on track.

I beg to differ.

Have a look at
http://www.manchesteronline.co.uk/men/news/s/168/168812_metrolink_the_truth.html

It details (through the freedom of information act) what happened when Manchester was rejected, I doubt anything remotely like this happened over there.

Also, Manchester, despite the knock back has continued to spend on the preperation works, see http://www.manchesteronline.co.uk/men/news/s/168/168814_flats_demolished_for_tram_line_that_isnt_there.html they have now spent over £300m on preperation works.

Finally, there are again (most days) two very pro Metrolink stories in the local paper - the campaign to Metrolink back on track has been intense, to claim that Leeds media / politicians have done 'everything that was possible' as has been claimed by one of you lot (you all know who it is), then you are not realising what really was possible, and what was required to get the £520m funding back again and a mention in the manifesto.

In post http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=4954553&postcount=25
H No1 claimed...


Well Leeds Council and Leeds have done as much as possible to get supertram sorted, its only the government who are holding it up.


Could you please provide the details what the Council orgainsed in Leeds that gets near to being comparable to what happened in Manchester following the money problems.

Have a read of the 'Metrolink - the truth' story - have a read of what happened - did the Leeds council spend £100k of council tax payers money on a public campaign to get back on track as happened over here? Did the council get a 40,000 petition organised and sent to the government. Did the local MP's put as much pressure on the government as is explained in the article.

H No1, for once, please backup your statement that Leeds did as much as was possible, remembering how much happened over in Manchester.

I expect a full and concise reply soon.



P.S. Reopening old heavy rail lines is not a cheap option - the cost of upgrades to the track, signalling, electric supply and bringing up to current standards makes it comparable to light rail, if not more expensive - again, as with light rail, the routes would only tend to be required along heavily used corridors.

I strongly suspect that you are going to end up with a half baked guided bus route system, that initially will get decent passenger numbers, but overtime, investment will lack and the number of people using it will decline.

In post http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=4954553&postcount=25
H No1 claimed...



Could you please provide the details what the Council orgainsed in Leeds that gets near to being comparable to what happened in Manchester following the money problems.

Have a read of the 'Metrolink - the truth' story - have a read of what happened - did the Leeds council spend £100k of council tax payers money on a public campaign to get back on track as happened over here? Did the council get a 40,000 petition organised and sent to the government. Did the local MP's put as much pressure on the government as is explained in the article.

H No1, for once, please backup your statement that Leeds did as much as was possible, remembering how much happened over in Manchester.

I expect a full and concise reply soon.



P.S. Reopening old heavy rail lines is not a cheap option - the cost of upgrades to the track, signalling, electric supply and bringing up to current standards makes it comparable to light rail, if not more expensive - again, as with light rail, the routes would only tend to be required along heavily used corridors.

I strongly suspect that you are going to end up with a half baked guided bus route system, that initially will get decent passenger numbers, but overtime, investment will lack and the number of people using it will decline.
I reckon you've hit the nail on the head. Nowhere near enough has been done to sway the Government over Leeds Supertram. I've not heard of any petitions going around, people getting angry with words buzzing in the heads of the local MPs, and the people of Withington sent a thunderbolt to the Government by overturning a 17,000 majority to produce one of the biggest shocks of the General Election, whilst other Labour MPs lost their seats in the Greater Manchester area, and even Ruth Kelly was left hanging onto a majority of little over 2,000 - raising fears that more MPs will be booted out if there's a failure to deliver on Metrolink.

You can sign the petition at www.leeds-supertram.co.uk

Wow, an on-line petition, that must have taken a lot to set up.

I presume the 'petition' was taken to 10 Downling Street by all the West Yorkshire MP's, many councillors and a host of celebrities to gain maximum media coverage as happened with the Manchester one.

You also failed to answer the question about how much the PTE put aside to spend on prmoting Spuertram locally (compared to the £100k over here).

Waiting for your complete answer to how



Well Leeds Council and Leeds have done as much as possible to get supertram sorted, its only the government who are holding it up.



When comparing it to what happened in Manchester, which got the money re-instated.

Yes it was. But not celebrities though I dont think.

I have no idea how much has been spent on promoting it. I cant find how much was being funded by metro though, but I think it was somin like £150m

Absolute bollocks, please provide evidence for either off these claims.

You are talking shite.

In fact, I am 99.999999% neither of these are true.

Are you saying that every councillor for Leeds and every MP in West Yorkshire went down with the petition?

I'd love to see a story or picture.

Plus, I would be stunned if you could show me a link to an article that describes the £150k that the PTE spent.



If you say they did spend £150k, what the hell did they spend it on - you seem to know more about this than I do.

I didnt say £150k, and I didnt say it was for promotion.

Wow, an on-line petition, that must have taken a lot to set up.

I presume the 'petition' was taken to 10 Downling Street by all the West Yorkshire MP's, many councillors and a host of celebrities to gain maximum media coverage as happened with the Manchester one.

You also failed to answer the question about how much the PTE put aside to spend on prmoting Spuertram locally (compared to the £100k over here).

Waiting for your complete answer to how



When comparing it to what happened in Manchester, which got the money re-instated.

Leeds has already spent £40 million on preparatory work. As for publicity - what did the other cities which had tram schemes approved and up and running spend on promoting their schemes ? The criterion is surely what the government think is value for money - influenced no doubt by the fact that we have no local MP who is a reall big hitter in government circles. It has been 15 (wasted?) years of trying for Leeds. My concern is that there is no viable plan B to follow without the trams.

Out of interest, if the petition has been deliered to Downing Street, why is it still on the web site to allow people to add to it?

Compare the WY PTE web site to http://www.gmpte.com/content.cfm?subcategory_id=109024

I want evidence of your claims that the local Leeds politicians asked as many questions in parliment on the subject (use Hansard) - searching on 'Metrolink' on the debates lists 205 debates which it was mentioned in (since 19th July 2004), "Leeds Supertram" was mentioned in 67 during the same time.

Why the difference?

Where the Leeds politicians not making as much of a stink as their Manchester counterparts?

Please provide evidence of your claims, otherwise I will (and other people) presume you simply made it up.

Fred - what I am pointing out is on 19th July both Manchester and Leeds got the knock back - H No1 claims that Leeds did as much as possible to get their scheme back on track - yet he seems unable to prove any of his wild claims.

I am pointing out that when the announcement was made in the two cities dealt with it totally differently, Manchester has spent about £300m on prepiatory work, had huge media campaigns and the local and national politicians have put loads of pressure on central government.

The £100k is, as far I am aware,unique to Manchester, as part of the decision to put as much public pressure on the government the PTE spent £100k on many public relations schemes, including public meetings in all affected towns (politicians spoke at all these), thousands of Metrolink postcards were created that the public were encouraged to send to Tony Blair.

In an ideal situation this would not be needed, however, this approach taken by Manchester has successfully got the £520m back (which will buy at least 2 and will fund the £102m upgrade to the existing infrastructure.

I think the difference in approach from the two PTE's has led to the different results, i.e. Manchester will be getting the upgrade and new lines (eventually), but Leeds will be left with a poor mans tram, the guided bus routes.


Still waiting for evidence of your claims H No1, if they don't appear I may start calling you Bullshit No1.

Nobody cares about Manchester here because this is a Leeds thread. The Manchester metrlink couldnt get much crapper anyway, its too loud and too old. Leeds has spent £40m already on the scheme. I dont even know what you want anyway.

No, this is not about Manchester B No1, this is simply asking you to justify your comment



Well Leeds Council and Leeds have done as much as possible to get supertram sorted, its only the government who are holding it up.



In

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=4954553&postcount=25


If you think that it is important that...

1 - People don't bullshit on these pages
2 - If you think that WY PTE should have tried everything possible to get the trams built in WY

Then maybe this thread is important, but, if you are happy for people to invent things that distort the reality of what actually happened, and what made a huge difference to a vital project in Leeds, one that is probably miles more important than anything else going on in Leeds at the moment then ignore it.


Basically, B No1, do you stand by your comments that WY PTE did as much as possible?

Do you not think that the difference in approach made a difference?

Do you not think that given the conclusion of this scheme appears to be vastly different to that in Manchester, do you not think this should be discussed on these pages?

Or should we only discuss the positive events in Leeds?

Nobody cares about Manchester here because this is a Leeds thread. The Manchester metrlink couldnt get much crapper anyway, its too loud and too old. Leeds has spent £40m already on the scheme. I dont even know what you want anyway.

You don't know whay he wants? He merely wants you to back up your statement here:

Well Leeds Council and Leeds have done as much as possible to get supertram sorted, its only the government who are holding it up.

And of course you have to take the obligatory dig at Manchester, again. :hahano:

Too loud and too old? The oldest lines are 13 years old, and one line is noisy because of track condition, something that can easily be rectified.

Too loud and too old? The oldest lines are 13 years old, and one line is noisy because of track condition, something that can easily be rectified.



Something that will be rectified by autumn 2007 - after the SUCCESSFUL campaign by the GMPTE to get £102m for the upgrade of phase 1 and 2.

It is amazing how B No1 quite happily bullshits to try to justify his position, then when asked to back his statement up tries to close down the conversation.

Back up you statement or shut up you know nothing.

I already backed it up, its just nobby who choses to be lazy or misread things.

I don't wish to get involved in this as Kurt has turned into a cock again, chasing no1 around the forum to tell him he's shit. True or not, it's stupid man. Give it a rest, sort it out in a thread elsewhere or something.

But for the record, you haven't backed anything up no1. Everything you've said is nothing but speculation, speculation that appears to have been concocted by yourself. Either grow up and use facts or just don't post anything at all.

No you haven't, you haven't backed up you claims.

You claim the £150k and the petition, yet I have been totally unable to find ANY media story about either of these, wonder why that is.

Evidence of your bull shit stories please?

Do you not think it important that people discuss the different outcomes for the two cities?

What in your opinion caused the different outcome if it was the the amount of effort put in by both camps?

Apologies, however, I do feel that it is an important point to discuss how some cities have done relatively better than others at getting their proposals through government than other, maybe other cities in the future could follow the successful model.

Now, if we are going to discuss this, we have to look at what happened in reality.

I am trying to do this, however, L No1 appears to have blatently lied, and I really cannot stand liars, they are the lowest of the low. There was absolutely no reason for him to make up what he did.

As I said in my previous posting, forget what L No1 has said, do others in Leeds believe WY did enough.

And before anyone says this is a pointless discussion, this very thing has been discussed on the Liverpool thread when their trams were cancelled in June.

I already did use facts.
www.leeds-supertram.co.uk if you're too lazy to read them.

I didnt claim £150k anyway. I said £150m

L No1 - for your info, the £150m - I think you are getting this confused with the prepriatory work, which I think you'll find is actually £40m I may be wrong and will check this figure.

However, this is not what I was talking about, GM have spent £300m on prepiatory work.

What I was talking about with the £100k was a huge publicity campaign, to encourage people to write to MP's, Tony Blair, Alistair Darling etc, there were lots of activities funded with this money.

To the best of my knowledge - this did not happen in Leeds.

This is what I mean, GM went miles further in trying to get back on track than over in WY.

You are still not managing to backup your claim that Leeds did as much as Manchester - or more, when you said that Leeds did as much as was possible.

Please don't make claims you cannot backup.

The link to the Supertram web site simply show a lack luster campaign, as does a quick search on the local papers.

Did the PTE pressure the local media to make a big deal of this? If not why not, if so, what happened, it isn't on the web site.

If the council have made as much effort as MCC then it's certainly not been reported like the campaign in Manchester. The people I speak to about trams don't actually seem to care too much really. What's needed here is the yep to go postal like the men and bang on about it like there's no tomorrow. Then they'd get public support, perhaps, but so far literally fuck all has been done that your common person on the street would know or give a monkeys about.

And what exactly am I supposed to see on the supertram site? Everything on there is no different from what's already known.

Apologies L No1 for calling you names, not big and not clever.

Slap my own wrists (I will learn one day).

However, could you please in return please show evidence of the campaign that was orcastrated by the PTE, as far as I can see there have been a couple of meetings between a 'delegation' from Leeds and the DfT, hardly compares to the goings on in GM.

For those who don't think the approach taken by the cities is important, see http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=5023829&postcount=154 in the Liverpool thread, looks like studies are going to take place into how cities fund raise for infrastructure improvements.

Surely there are lessons to be learnt from the relative success in GM compared to WY?

Is this due to the the publicity and pressure or something else? This is something that cities need to learn from and utilise in the future.

no I said £150m was being put into supertram from metro. I will reply in full later, Im in a bit of a rush to get the train at the moment.

L No1, I think you have got confused by how these things are funded. The local PTE always funds a good proportion if the cost.

e.g. of the £102m for the upgrade work agreed over here (from memory) £54 came from local funds, and £48m from the £520m awarded by government.

This is the same everywhere, all systems have a proportion paid for locally, and a proportion paid for centrally.

The specific point was GM spent £100k on a PUBLICITY campaign - nothing to do with the building of the system, but simply going the extra mile (i.e. doing all they possibly could).

You seemed to suggest that WY have done as much as was possible, I beg to differ, do you still stand by this accersion?

And before anyone says this is a pointless discussion, this very thing has been discussed on the Liverpool thread when their trams were cancelled in June.
FYI No trams have been cancelled in Liverpool. The government has decided not to give a blank cheque, which was always the case. Liverpool have been discussing different funding options and getting the five boroughs together to see if a decent package can be brought together for the good of all.....the money from the government is still there

Probably not the right place to discuss whether or not Liverpool will be getting trams, we'll have to wait and see, but given that 2008 is getting very close timescales are a big worry there.

But yes, you are right the government has said that the £170m is still on the table in Liverpool - unlike Leeds and Portsmouth.

As much as you may think this continual argument adds value to the pursuit of a Supertram it does not and is frankly dull.

Whether Leeds spent £1 or £1m on publicity should not make any difference to a final decision by the Minister for Transport. As I am sure you agree they would look at the facts of whether the service would add value and ultimately improve public transport in the city. If the answer is yes and the cost is viable, then I am sure the answer would be yes, if not....

I cannot imagine that a straw poll of people in the city would be conducted to help make the decision.

Typhoo - maybe, maybe not.

That is what this discussion is about.

Firstly, do we agree that a different approach was taken by the GMPTE compared to the WY PTE? i.e. GM kicked up a stick, and went hell for leather to get back on track, whereas WY seems not to have done.

GM seems to be partially (at least) back on track, with the Labour party manifesto saying that the funding is going to happen, Tony Blair promising it will get built, the DfT providing at least £520m and the upgrade getting the go ahead.


So, Typhoo, you may be correct, the publicity may not have been the factor that swang the government, but if this is the case, it is quite possible that the reasoning for the difference may be different cost / benifit ratios.

If this is the case, I wonder if WY is working on increasing the cost / benifit ratio, as has happened with the airport line over here.

What are your opinions on the WY PTE trying to make the proposals more cost effective? e.g. potentially cutting lines, building one at a time, moving the routes of lines?

This would involve long delays in what may possibly get done, and would obviously involve risks as it may get knocked back again, or would you prefer a more definite option such as guided buses.

Whether or not the council have done enough themselves isn't really here nor there. Without the support of the yep, I can't see much happening. MCC were fortunate to be best mates with the MEN. YEP just don't seem to have this relationship with LCC, although this is only my own observations. Whether this is true is nowt but conjecture. But like I say, from what I see the main difference has been the involvement of the local media and here, they don't seem to have realised just how important the tram could be to the city. Thus leaving the council to drum up support themselves (which they have tried to do. They lit up the Queens hotel in City Square with a massive tram to promote support).

dgnr - interesting that the local media has not shown much interest.

Does Leeds have any of it's own newspapers, or are the all Yorkshire ones? If they are Yorkshire, then surely they have got Sheffield in the catchment, and although not the most successful initially, it has certainly improved Sheffield since it's construction - surely the same journos who deal with the Sheffield Supertram would be the same for Leeds?

Or does Lees have it's own dedicated newspapers like here?

The YEP is the MEN. It's a Leeds paper which covers the apparent Metro area, similar to the MEN covering all of Greater Manc, even sometimes Warrington. Bizzarely. There's also the T&A which I think covers more the Bradford area, but it's sold all over Leeds. There's the Yorkshire Post too, I'm not too sure about that mind. I think it's a morning edition of the YEP but in broadsheet form. The YEP, exactly the same as the MEN, is very much in the Daily Mirror/Sun vain. Which upsets me on all fronts.

There may be more and my info may be wrong but that's what I gather.

Oh aye, the YEP is based in Leeds city centre too. You can't miss the huge lit up Yorkshire Evening Post sign as you drive through the city centre motorway in't evening.

And I'm not saying that the media haven't taken an interest. They have. But from what I can see, it hasn't been anyway near the ferocity the MEN has backed the Metrolink.

Surprised no one has picked up on this...

http://www.leedstoday.net/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=103&ArticleID=1119159

Why guided buses are not the answer
As a transport professional I find the result of the recent meeting between the Leader of Leeds City Council and the Transport Secretary quite bizarre.
To venture down the guided bus route in preference to a tramway could result in the biggest waste of public money the city has ever known. There is no practical comparison between the two modes of transport.
Guided buses have their vociferous but misguided advocates. The two major schemes are Essen and Adelaide. The latter has experienced several rear end collisions on long stretches. Essen has had some of the more exotic features abandoned. Nancy, in France, tried a system with 80 metre long three-unit articulated trolley buses but had to rethink when two fatal incidents occurred when the rear units lost stability and struck an overhead line mast.
Edinburgh closed its pilot scheme for major repairs after barely six months operation.
In Leeds, we have a dual carriageway wide enough to take a double track tramway in the centre reservation blessed with a rather pointless single guideway plus a conventional one-direction bus lane for the opposite direction.
The same effect could have been achieved by continuous conventional side bus lanes in both directions at a fraction of the cost and with very little disruption.
Leeds needs a carefully executed Light Rail System (tramway) integrated with sensible bus and other systems. A rough check shows 400 cities worldwide, (roughly 250 in Europe), have tramways, with less than ten having guided buses. All have extensive conventional bus systems.
From this are we to judge that 400 cities have got it wrong and only ten are on the right lines. I think not.
Don Townsley, Whitkirk, Leeds
l The letter from David Robinson (YEP, August 13) about the cost of the planned Leeds supertram to council tax payers is unnecessarily glum.
The £40m spent on preparations for the supertram was largely on property. That property has more than doubled in value and if sold will more than cover the past outlay over the past years.
The Olympic Games in 2012, at a cost of £12 billion for transport in East London, will use up funds originally available for northern cities.
Gordon Brown has burst the Public finances and now hasn't the money even to keep Leeds hospitals going without cuts, as reported in the YEP.
Coun David Schofield, West Yorkshire Passenger Transport Authority, Temple Newsham, Leeds

Delighting in the Abbey
Over the last few weeks due to the dry weather many people have enjoyed a visit to Kirkstall Abbey and the museum and the surrounding fields. The £2.5m refurbishment of the abbey is now well under way and the gardeners have kept up their usual good standard. It is a credit to all concerned. It is my opinion, and shared by many, that this part of Kirkstall Valley should be declared a conservation area free from developers.
Mr Jack Fisher, Vesper Gardens, Kirkstall, Leeds

Well thats the exact point. If theres absolutely no reason why Leeds shouldn't be a priority city to get a supertram, why isnt it getting it? Well its down to rubbish people in a South biased government. I agree some money can be put into Londons transport in order for the olympics- but £12bn!? thats ridiculous. Unless they are lines directly serving Olympic Venues, why can't London have a guided busway??? I bet if Leeds did try and get a really good guided busway to get about 1/2 the quality of a tram but still as good as a busway will get it would go into problems. I'm surpised the northern cities are supporting London 2012.

How embarressing for Edinburgh, having their guided busway shut down after just 6 months! However, the routes were designed to be eventually converted to tramlines.

I predicted this several months ago and was slammed for it. I fully expect Liverpool and Leeds both to go down the guided bus route, possibly with a good start, but after a short while the systems will turn into nothing more than expensive bus routes.

Be interested if anyone knows what cost / benifit ratios the Leeds lines are.

fwiw, Line 1 in Liverpool is 1.1 from memory (scrapping past - prior to the price rise), Manchester lines vary between 2.3 and 2.7 (I think).

This could be the reason Leeds is struggling so much - especially if the price rise has caused the ratio to dip below 1.

Well at least the government has made a tidy profit off the land bought for the supertram, what are you betting that this money will be put back into London?


I can't understand, how they will happily hand over 12 bilion pounds for transport in London, when it already has one of the most exstensive and effective mass transit systems in the world, yet they barely consider handing over 300 million to one of the major cities in the UK.

Skopie - the money spend on the land will have been done by the local PTE, therefore, when they sell it the money will be kept locally - the central government have nothing to do with this.

Found it, the cost benefit over 30 years (I thought this was meant to be calculated over 25 years in this country ???) is 1.5 - right on the new government target since the 3 rejections last year - rising to 2.2 oer 60 years - only the French would use a term that long to calculate value for money (I seem to remember they use 60 years for heavy rails schemes).


over its initial 30-year operating
period, Supertram would deliver a
cost benefit ratio of 1.5 to 1
which, over a 60-year period,
would rise to 2.2 to 1.


Taken from http://www.wymetro.com/NR/rdonlyres/48EA3F0B-E157-45CA-8166-0A9F178EEB13/0/Directions1.pdf

Describing the requirement for a 1.5 ratio...
http://www.britishtramsonline.co.uk/newsfeb05.html

in the section taking about the Brum underground proposals...


....if the feasibility study on an underground came back with the cost benefit ratio of 1:5 required by the DfT. When the Birmingham Post tried to contact someone from the council....


The syntax is wrong in that article, it should read 1.5, i.e. 1.5 to 1 benefit to cost, and not 1:5 - nothing would ever get near a cost benefit of 1:5 i.e. 5 times more benefit to cost.

Leeds won't go for a guided bus system- it will go for supertram or nothing.

Fancy putting a bet on that?

In my opinion Leeds will be constructing a guided bus network by 2009.

I have been thinking about the reasons for the apparent death of this project, and reckn there may be a clue in those cost benefit ratios - 1.5 is right on the line.

Now bare in mind those figures are using the WY PTE figures and plans on everything - now I would not be surprised if the DfT have found something they are not happy with - such as happened in Liverpool with their proposals for how to purchase the actual trams, in the end this added £30m to the original costs provided by the PTE. If such a problem has occurred then the ratio will have dropped below 1.5 - at which point the project would be dead.

On the positive side, they may be working to resolve any such issues, on the negative side, they are most likely nt hve anywhere near enough time since compulsary orders need renewing in September.

Now I may be totally wrong, but the more I hear on this, the more confident I become that my original prediction will come true - unfortunately.


Those who think the PTE won't go for guided buses, could they please explain why they believe this, given they appear to have had discussions with the DfT on this subject.

P.S. - my original prediction, many months ago, was that Leeds and Liverpool will be consructing guided bus routes before the next general election (presuming it is in 2009).

There is nothing wrong with the actual planned concept of the Leeds Supertram. Its even been given planning permission. The only thing its missing is the green light from the DfT with the funding. A guided busway won't be built because there are already guided busways which havent improved bus travel in Leeds considerably- the city would rather put money towards another big than to busways.

There is nothing wrong with the actual planned concept of the Leeds Supertram. Its even been given planning permission. The only thing its missing is the green light from the DfT with the funding.


Nothing major then, just whose going to pay for it???? Bit like the mansion in Hale I am going to buy, it's built and for sale, only problem is I cannot afford the £2m price tag.

Your last line doesn't make sense - Leeds will not be making the final decision as to whether a tram goes ahead or not, this is out off their hands.

We'll see over the next couple off years who is right about the possibility of the guided buses, but I fear that after losing out on the trams, Leeds will rush (or panic) into the only alternative available to them - guided buses - believe me, I'd love to see Leeds getting trams as much as the next person, however, I do like to think I have a touch of reailty to bring to everyones high hopes.

The thing is, if (when) the Supertram scheme finally bites the dust, to resurect it will take decades - if you are 15 now, you won't see trams in Leeds before your 30th at the earliest I fear.

I don’t think Leeds will readily accept an extension of the busways it already has I don’t know, overall, what benefits they have brought and how successful they have been – even after operating for a number of years I don’t think I have seen any credible public detailed assessment of them. In my own experience, on the Scott Hall corridor, only marginal benefits have been achieved. Some increase of frequency of buses has occurred denoting greater passenger use, but the route concerned mostly serves areas which have relatively low car usage any way. Because of residents’ protests only one of the two proposed park and ride car parks was built, and judging by the 40-50 cars usually to be seen in the one built at King Lane there must be some small relief of car traffic from the area. Because the car park aimed at car commuters from Harrogate was the one not built the full potential of the system has never been attained. The possibility of tidal running of buses (to the city in the morning rush hour and from the city in the evening) was apparently ruled out for safety reasons. Prepaid ticketing, which would have saved more time at rush hours than is saved by the busways, has never been introduced – even though only one bus company, First Leeds, runs all the routes operating on the corridor.

I can’t comment on the East Leeds corridor, but the Scott Hall busways lead to juddering of the buses which my wife, with a bad back, particularly feels. Fortunately we have a choice of buses from where I live and we always choose the bus route which does not use the guided busways. The difference in comfort- especially to my wife - is palpable.

My conclusion is that guided busways, as operated in Leeds, does not bring the hoped for benefits and is not worth the money involved in constructing them.

Interesting times ahead then - very hard discussions and decisions ahead should the trams eventually die as expected.

There is nothing wrong with the actual planned concept of the Leeds Supertram. Its even been given planning permission. The only thing its missing is the green light from the DfT with the funding. A guided busway won't be built because there are already guided busways which havent improved bus travel in Leeds considerably- the city would rather put money towards another big than to busways.
If supertram does get replaced with guided busways, then you wont be getting one like the one you have now which runs conventional buses, you will most likely have these running along it:
http://www.irisbus.com/uploads/IM_EDITORIAL/20030108/civis.jpg

http://www.narpac.org/irisbus1.jpg

http://milanotrasporti.ferrovie.ch/IMG/jpg/Civis_Irisbus_1-20-02-03.jpg

The Irisbuses are the next generation of the guided busway. As you can tell, they look like a supertram and inside is like a supertram too. Its just a case of no tracks, no wires.
They dont use petrol to run like a normal bus, they use an electric engine which requires a small amount of diesel to power the battery.
They dont need to be steered. They have a special sensor on the front which follows markings on the guideroute, so the driver only needs to start and stop the bus at stops.
The company will convince Leeds that this is just like having a tram system but cheaper and this is probably what you will end up with. Could be several years away though.

Very nice, Acurra, but where's the space for the tracks on Leeds streets and roads ?

They use a small amount of diesel to power the electric motor - are you serious - these things are terribly inefficient - the technology to convert the diesel powered buses kenetic energy into stored electric as it slows (breaks) is shite to say the least. These things use in the region of 10% (slightly less) diesel than your standard bus.

They are also the things that keep crashing and killing people.

http://www.leeds-supertram.co.uk/NR/rdonlyres/98065D7F-6D92-4EBE-AA18-9D47457D08AC/0/3routes21km.jpg

http://www.leeds-supertram.co.uk/NR/rdonlyres/3C248E6B-8822-4A8D-B9D5-179C8BFA5006/0/map_lrg_centre.gif

http://www.leeds-supertram.co.uk/NR/rdonlyres/264A6034-C03B-45C8-95AC-425194AA45E6/0/map_lrg_north.gif

http://www.leeds-supertram.co.uk/NR/rdonlyres/4279878E-BB86-418B-845B-8D17D409854C/0/map_lrg_east.gif

http://www.leeds-supertram.co.uk/NR/rdonlyres/A6C0C44B-68A1-4C8C-994D-8D3EB638C30B/0/SmallSouthLeedsPhase2.jpg


Does anyone have a rail map of Leeds with current and disused rail lines? I have one for England and Wales, but it doesn't go further than Chester-Sheffield (hence missing out Leeds, Liverpool, Manchester and all the other English

From Leeds Economy Bulletin - August 2005

The Government has told city leaders in Leeds to go
back to the drawing board and consider a bus scheme
instead of Supertram. The Government has requested
further investigations into alternatives and funding
arrangements to be prepared jointly by Metro, LCC and
the DfT. It will need to be undertaken by September at
the very latest.

Doesn't look very good, does it?

From Leeds Economy Bulletin - August 2005

The Government has told city leaders in Leeds to go
back to the drawing board and consider a bus scheme
instead of Supertram. The Government has requested
further investigations into alternatives and funding
arrangements to be prepared jointly by Metro, LCC and
the DfT. It will need to be undertaken by September at
the very latest.

Doesn't look very good, does it?

Of course it doesn't. Problem is, does the WYPTE and/or city council have a plan B to dust off the shelves to deal with Leeds' traffic problems ?

Anyone else starting to believe me about guided buses yet?

Guided Buses won't happen in Leeds- it'll be supertram or nothing. Its almost certain another bid will be made- guided busways already operate in Leeds and are inefficent and take up too much space. Moeny should be saved instead of having guided busways so the city can put more of its own money towards it increasing the chances of a supertram. Another bid would be more expensive anyway seeing as prices will have certainly risen by then, in everything, not just building costs.

Guided Buses won't happen in Leeds- it'll be supertram or nothing. Its almost certain another bid will be made- guided busways already operate in Leeds and are inefficent and take up too much space. Moeny should be saved instead of having guided busways so the city can put more of its own money towards it increasing the chances of a supertram. Another bid would be more expensive anyway seeing as prices will have certainly risen by then, in everything, not just building costs.
It won't be Supertram, so I guess it'll be nothing.

I like your optimism and hope that in some way you are right and that in some way the PTE work out a way off making progress with the trams.

However, with more than a decade of in depth knowledge of this, it seems to me that the PTE are moving over to plan B.

The problem they will have is if they say they don't want to go down the guided bus route, and are quite happy with thing how they are, the DfT will question whether any major investement is actually required, since the PTE is turning down the chance for a major transport infrastructure improvement (as the DfT would see it).

For these reasons, I cannot see the PTE turning down anything they are offered to be honest.

It is more likeley they will say that they want a supertram, not guided busway- the city council were disgraced at this suggestion, and shows that the DfT have little interest in providing any other city outside London with a decent public transport system. Accepting a guided busway is basically giving in. If it did opt for a guided busway it would still have to have planning, building and practically all the work supertram has needed anyway.

Not wanting to be patronising here but, I don't think you understand the relationship between the DfT and PTE's.

The WY PTE has been put in a corner here by the civil service in the DfT.

However, in London, (and Manchester) the civil service at the DfT is under pressure from the politicians to treat those areas differently - since pulic transport is an issue in those regions.

Since, the DfT civil service seems to be quite anti-light rail, you need 2 things to make progress in this country...

1) A good economic case for the scheme you are promoting
2) A fair bit of public pressure to ensure that the scheme cannot be dropped, as the politicians will suffer.

Only a couple of places have achieved both of these goals, Leeds is not one off them (yet).

Both of those things have been shown though, and I've forgotten who it was now, but whoever it was said he was impressed by the scheme- but then nothing further seemed to happen.

Probably John Prescott - he always likes to put his oar into these schemes.

I truely do hope you're correct, but seriously, the trams are dead, the PTE will be forced into a scheme they don't really want, and you'll end up with a white elephant that will end up costing nearly as much as the trams would have.


The only hope if a major reduction in plans, i.e. somehow making one line, that has a very good cost benefit ratio.



I won't post in this thread again until we have more concrete news - I think we are going around in circles now - I hope i's in better times, but as I say, don't get your hopes up, prepare yourselves for the worst here.

I doubt this supertram scheme will go ahead, and if it doesnt, I doubt there will be many changes to the West Yorkshire transport map by 2010, except maybe some new rail stations and rail lines (Such as an airport extension) planned. I can see clearly why these routes were chosen, but I would have somehow tried to get a line to Bradford, even though there are already 2 well served rail lines to the city.

I think the council will have to eventually back down and accept guided buses. If they wanted supertram so badly, they should have started a more persistant campaign and MUCH earlier on so they could really hammer the message home.
They may go for the option of constructing guided busways which can eventually be converted into tramways, like in Edinburgh.

Well theres been a campaign for quite a while now- it won't accept guided busways- its more likeley it will turn them down and put in another supertram bid because eventually a supertram or equivalent will have to be built because naturally, how many cities as big and important as Leeds don't have supertrams or equivalents? Leeds compared itself to similar sized Frankfurt to prove what the city could easily be with good transport- the financial benefits would be greater than the cost anyway.

The biggest upset of the elections was my own Keith Bradley of Withington losing his seat. There's no other reason I can think off (than the Metro) that would've caused him to lose his seat. Tha man has been nothing but a true servant to Withington and South Manchester in general. Alas, the people went against him and voted Lib Dem. Considering the people in Withington/Didsbury etc, I do doubt he lost his seat over anything else other than the Metro. This kind of thing just hasn't happened in Leeds. That's what Kurt's point is regarding public uprising, no1. The level of backlash in Manchester really hasn't been anywhere near the amount experienced in Manchester. And at the end of the day, the lack of ferocious support for the cause seems to have been the downfall of the supertram. Leese and Bernstein could've parped on all they like in Manc, without Mancunian's (almost militia like) support, I doubt we'd be seeing the Government "backing" Metrolink as they are.

And no City but London can challenge Frankfurt right now. Let's be realistic about things.

Yeah but I mean Frankfurt is of similar size to Leeds and was meant to be used as a comparison of what Leeds' transport system should be- and probably most regional cities. I think it was John Prescott yes.

Frankfurts population is about 2 million L No. 1, with a metro of 5 million.

Frankfurts population is about 2 million L No. 1, with a metro of 5 million.

Also, in keeping with the subject of this forum, Frankfurt has four buildings amongst the world's 300 highest (London only has three). Naturally, Leeds has none.

Frankfurts population is about 2 million L No. 1, with a metro of 5 million.
And also, whilst Leeds might be a comparartively prosperous provincial city by UK standards (GVA around £18,300 pp), UK provincial cities aren't particularly prosperous by European standards. Frankfurt has a GVA of around £55,000 pp.

Sorry, said I wouldn't joing in but...

One quater of the population and a third of the wealth per person - quite similar really :)

Frankfurts population is about 2 million L No. 1, with a metro of 5 million.
Metrolink said all that needs to be said. And for Munich, the GVA is around 73,000 Euros (something like £50,000). This is what being in the big league is all about, and in comparison, our cities are small fry - even Bristol with a GVA of around £24,000 pp, whatever we may think.

And also, whilst Leeds might be a comparartively prosperous provincial city by UK standards (GVA around £18,300 pp), UK provincial cities aren't particularly prosperous by European standards. Frankfurt has a GVA of around £55,000 pp.

Yes but it is the financial capital of Germany if not of the whole of continental Europe.

Yes but it is the financial capital of Germany if not of the whole of continental Europe.
It is the financial capital of Germany, but there are other German cities which are very wealthy themselves and have very high GVAs like Munich with a GVA of around £50,000.

It is the financial capital of Germany, but there are other German cities which are very wealthy themselves and have very high GVAs like Munich with a GVA of around £50,000.

Maybe that's why they can afford good transport sysytems !

Maybe that's why they can afford good transport sysytems !
True. They've got a north-south ICE (Inter City Express) high speed line which runs from Hamburg to Munich and have a high speed ICE line from the Ruhr to Berlin, both built in the last 20 years or so, with more planned.

God - you have brought me back into this.

Germany Lande (regions) have much much much more automonay than regions in this country (as do the Swiss Cantons), since both countries as so wealthy (remember Germany's overall figures are dragged down by East Germany, and the locals are willing to pay higher taxes for better services, promoting such projects is significantly easier there than here.

This along with a million and one other things (e.g. population densities being another) go to show the total irrelevance off comments such as 'Leeds is the largest city in Europe without a tram system'.

The wealth among German cities is also better shared than in the UK, because Germany is nowhere near as centralised. If you took off a third of London's 15 million metro population, then we would begin to look something like Germany.

London currently has a larger combined population than Berlin, Hamburg, Munich and Cologne. In the next 5 years its population will be larger than the combined populations of Berlin, Hamburg, Munich, Cologne and Frankfurt.

For those in the regional/periphery cities of course it would sound unfair that London should be getting more, but thats life! Also I think some people seem to be getting confused over wealth of cities. Some parts of the UK are the richest on the face of the planet (Inner London is the richest region in the EU), but they don't do so well when compared to other cities because of the distribution of wealthy people in the city boundaries. This is gradually changing, but it does distort the image. The UK is now wealthier per capita than Western Germany, France, Japan and Italy.

I think if government put more effort towards public transport and the regional cities made more effort in trying to put forward a better business plan and facilitated faster density growth in the cores then there would be less problems.

There also has to be greater emphasis on the property development around these nodes. The Hong Kong MTR is profitable simply because it redevelops the land around its stations and is thus the main beneficiary from the rail usage.

Nick, I don't want to get into a long discussion about the merits of 'over investing' in the London region, compared to the rest of the country - but if we do continue this, those in the south-east are going to have to start getting used to paying more and more to the regions in terms off support, as the economy will continue to grow disproportionally in one corner of the country.

I notice you don't mention Switerland in your comparison per capita - a truely federal country, which doesn't have the huge rich / poor divide like we have in this country, they are all simply well off.

I would suggest that if you had been born in a poor council estate in Hartlepool then you would have a slightly different view on the merits of concentrating funding in one part of the country.

As someone with left wing political leanings, I want to give everyone an equal oppurtunity in live, in this country we don't, those bought up in poorer areas have much less chance than those in more prosperous areas (I am one off the very lucky ones). The continuous investment in the richer areas make this worse in my opinion.

Please feel free to reply, and totally disagree with all I have written, don't expect a further response, I have discussed this a million times on here before.

I'm unsure with what you mean by 'over-investing', when its been the opposite! The north has been subsidised by the south for some time now, hell Crossrail has been planned since 1930! That said, you can't keep throwing money into a bottomless pit and the northern cities really need to work together more to act as a counterweight to London.

London has a population the size of Switzerland! Also wealth inequality isn't terribly different between Switzerland and the UK (33.1 - 36.0, ie Gini Coefficient difference of 2.9, compare that to the 40.8 GC score for the US, ie a 4.8 difference between the UK ans US). You drastically exagerate the difference.

I assume you didn't know that the most deprived wards in the UK aren't in the north, but in London's East End - exactly where most of the regeneration is going on. I think the northern cities need to band together instead of continually in-fighting.

hi Im back- without decent links between the northern cities they can't act together as well as the greater london region can. Money needs to be put into northern cities so they can become functional together before they can act as a counterweight- things like supertram.

Quite a large article on the current situation with Supertram in 'Tramways and Urban Transit' this month.

It starts by saying that the project 'has been dealt a virtual killer blow'.

It goes on to say, despite the £39m already spent the DfT doesn't believe the project is affordable, or light rail is even the best option.

Although the government has not finally slammed the door prospects extremely bleak, compounded by compulsary purchase orders expiring in Sept.

Bit off news here though...

In July a couple of councillors (Mark Harris and Karam Hussein met Derek Twigg, they asked for a swift decision, however, they did not even put their proposals on the table, instead the DfT issued a raft off new queries. The councillors had expected a more positive response - this is seen as a stalling tactic, before the inevitable cancelling of the project.

Harris very unhappy - been told to look at guided bus instead by the DfT - he is very sceptical

Twigg says major concerns remain, we have asked for further info on the project, we have asked them to look at the bus option. Twigg also says, recognise need to find way forward - however, must be affordable (Given they have said trams not affordable this is vital as far as I can tell).

Harris said the government made no attempt to discuss how to make the tram option viable. (This compares dramatically with some other cities).

Harris said they didn't cancel the tram outright, but didn't want to discuss how to get it back on track.

Council and PTE will work with the DfT over the following month (Sept) to look at a range off alternatives, such as guided buses, they will present these to government by end of Sept.

Twigg to give decision on alternative by end off month.















As I say, guided buses look to be going to Leeds.

Transport chiefs in crucial meeting

Last attempt to save city’s Supertram

By Paul Robinson

IT’S a battle that many in Leeds have already written off as a lost cause.

But today local transport chiefs were preparing to embark on the final phase of their attempt to rescue the city’s Supertram dream.

That fight was dealt a major blow two months ago when ministers put off an all-important decision on Leeds’s latest attempt to win funding for the £500m scheme.

At the same time civic leaders were asked to consider whether guided buses would do just as much to ease congestion as alight rail network – news that was widely seen as sounding the death knell for Supertram.

However, bosses at Metro, the West Yorkshire public transport supervisory body that is heading up the long-delayed project with Leeds City Council, are refusing to wave the white flag.

They have revealed they are close to completing the extra work requested by the Department for Transport and will head back to Whitehall later this month armed with findings they believe could prove crucial.

A spokesman for Metro said: “We are certain that we will be able to confirm that the tram is a far more effective transport option than buses on the planned routes.

“We will be calling for Leeds Supertram to be given the same hearing that other cities’ schemes have received.”

Leeds had hoped to learn the fate of its plans before Parliament’s summer recess got under way in July.

Compulsory purchase powers for 120 pockets of land along the network’s proposed route run out next March and the acquisitions have to start as soon as possible if the job is to be done on time. An announcement when MP’s return to the Commons in October could come too late for the city, hence Metro’s eagerness to squeeze a decision out of the DfT at this month’s talks.

Supertram would serve Lawnswood in the north, Whinmoor in the east and Hunslet in the south of Leeds, carrying an estimated 19 million passengers a year.

It was given the green light by the Government in 2001, only for Transport Secretary Alistair Darling to pull the plug on its funding early last year amid concerns about spiralling costs.

The city’s current, scaled down, bid for support was submitted to the DfT in November.

Metro and the council have had to look on enviously over the last decade or so as modern tram systems in Sheffield, Manchester and Nottingham got the go-ahead.

From the Yorkshire Evening Post, 1/9/05

Any update on this? Time is ticking on with this, anything in the local paper recently?

Supertram indecision 'may derail hopes for prosperity'

Future of Leeds in jeopardy, say city's council leaders

By DAVID MARSH
THE vibrant, successful Leeds economy could be derailed by the Government's failure to make a decision on the city's long-delayed supertram scheme.
Today council chiefs are issuing their most severe warning that as their patience runs out the city's future is being jeopardised.
Leeds first drew up its supertram proposals in the late 1980s and almost 20 years later is still waiting for a decision on whether the Government is prepared to commit funds to the project.
Rivals
While Leeds waited patiently, rival cities including Manchester, Sheffield, Birmingham and Nottingham were all given the go- ahead to build tram networks. Now it is clear the city's patience is running out.
A meeting of the full council was today discussing the damage the delay was causing to the city's economy.
It comes just a day after junior minister David Miliband visited Leeds to learn how the Government could help the city achieve its aims and ambitions.
In a statement issued ahead of the council meeting, Coun Mark Harris, council leader, said: "People in Leeds desperately want a safe, reliable and affordable public transport system.
"All the evidence clearly shows that supertram is the best way of providing this in terms of cost effectiveness, reducing congestion, and the regeneration benefits that it will provide for the city.
"All the main political parties in Leeds agree that supertram is vital.
"We're now at a stage where if we don't get final approval from the Government very soon then we'll have to abandon the scheme. However, transport minister Alistair Darling seems incapable of giving us a straight yes or no.
"I suspect that, by just letting the time run out, he hopes to avoid the bad publicity he'll get by admitting the Government has spent the money elsewhere. That's a cowardly way to go about your business, and it's an insult to the intelligence of the people of Leeds."
"Supertram is all the more essential when you look at the issue against a backdrop of the Government's complete failure to deliver reliable and affordable public transport.
"John Prescott pledged to reduce car traffic back in 1997 – but the Department of Transport's own figures show that it's actually increased by more than 10% since then. In the same period bus fares have increased and services are still unreliable."
Resolution
The resolution put to today's meeting says: "This council condemns the Government's decision to make no final decision on the future of Supertram.
"Council notes that although representatives of the council and Metro met with the parliamentary under-secretary for state, Derek Twigg MP, on the July 26 no decision has yet been taken by the Department of Transport. Council therefore calls on all those with an interest in ensuring Leeds has an effective transport system for the 21st century to continue lobbying the Government to take a positive decision on Supertram.
david.marsh@ypn.co.uk
15 September 2005

he'll get by admitting the Government has spent the money elsewhere.


I strongly suspect that is the case - I don't think the government ever has said the money is still on the table have they?

Will the supertram actually be any cheaper to use than the current buses in place at the moment?

Not a chance - be similar to the buses, maybe a bit more.

Are the major routes into the City Centre badly run? Often late?
IMO services to areas that will be unaffected by the Supertram will remain as dodgy as they are now. I can see bus companies pocketing the savings and not reinvesting, if and when the ST replaces these routes.

Having had that little gripe I do think Leeds needs a supertram, especially if it is to move forward as a growing, modern city.
Unfortunately we're still not modern, despite all the new build.

I like your optimism there Stig, but I think the possibility off the Supertram getting built in Leeds in the next couple off decades is diminishing rapidly.

I am pretty sure it will get one in the next few decades, not sure about this particular scheme though. Supertram fares will be competetive with bus prices, because the ywant people to use the system- www.leeds-supertram.co.uk

I hope oyu are right No1 - however, given light rails projects history in this country - if as looks likely, these lines end up being bus routes, then the PTE will be back to square one.

It typically takes around 20 - 30 years in this country from coming up with the idead to buld the line along a route (Leeds would not even be at this point) to actually getting funding in place and construction starting.

The huge amount of detailed work, negotiations etc seem to take for ever in the UK.

For another supretram scheme in Leeds, the work in preperation could be done within 5 years- most the work for this one has been recent years work. Its more of a cost issue than time.

Are you simply picking numbers out of the air here, or do you have any evidence to suggest that Leeds would be able to get through public enquires, Transport and Public Works regulations and all the rest off the bureaucracy that we have in this country in record time?

If so I'd like to hear it.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/west_yorkshire/4267606.stm
City keeps up pressure for trams

It is claimed only trams can relieve Leeds's traffic congestion
Transport officials in Leeds have renewed their campaign for the government to give the go-ahead to the city's planned Supertram system.
In July, transport minister Derek Twigg asked West Yorkshire public transport organisation Metro whether the money would be better spent on buses.

Metro has reviewed its plans and has again concluded trams are needed.

Even if the scheme is approved, it is unlikely the first trams will be running before 2011.

A Metro spokesman said: "In response to Mr Twigg's request, we have completed a further review into a high quality bus option and provided additional details of the local funding for the tram option.

Legal powers

"Once again the tram proved to be cost-effective and the only solution that will provide the range and level of long term benefits needed by the city and the region along the planned routes."

The new information has been sent to the Department for Transport along with a reminder that an early decision is needed so work can start on buying more than 200 pieces of land needed for the scheme.

Legal powers the council have to buy the land expire in March 2006.

A spokeswoman at the Department for Transport said: "It is important we make the right decision which we will come to in due course."

Still think Leeds will get one in the 'next few decades' given that if this scheme had have been given the go ahead then no trams would have been running before 2011?

There is a letter in Tramways and Urban Transit this month, from David Schofield a member of the the WY PTA (i.e. a councillor) - he says thatthe reports off the £40m spent are unnecessarily glum - the money that has been spent has been mostly spent on buying property, this will be recouped when this land is sold.
He goes on to link the £12bn to be spent on the London transport for 2012 to funding being cut to northern cities, including some Leeds hospitals that are having funding cuts.


All in all it is a very very glum letter.


There is also a very very long letter (that I haven't read yet) titled, 'Why guided buses can never be the answer - they just cannot do the job as well as trams' written by Don Townsley of the Leeds Civic trust - scanning the article he is arguing against Leeds being forced down the guided bus route, which the DfT appear to be doing.

Right the very long letter, it comes from Dom Townsley - he is a long term chartered engineer and transport consultant, a member of the Leeds civic trust.

He starts off describing how the fact the DfT / PTE meeting have ended with no solution. despite being up against the wire in terms off time constraints to be very bizarre.

He says to go down the guided bus route in preference to trams would result in the largest possible waste off public money since no practical comparison can be made between the two modes.

He gives several examples off where guided buses have been tried, all having failed, some with quite tragic concequences.

He goes on to describe how the route would work, how the tracks would align in certain roads - making it more efficient to buses.

He compares the 400 cities world wide (250 in Europe) with trams, but less than 10 have guided buses.

He says it should not be a case of buses or trams, but more a combination off both. However, along certain corridors, along which high numbers of people move, a mass transit system capable of moving those people is required - otherwise Leeds as a whole will suffer.

He goes on to say, the most effiecient and readily available method of moving the numbers of people in question is to us trams.

He points out the difference in the previous generation of trams, and how the newer generation are significantly better all round, e.g. smoother ride, less noise etc.

He lists loads of cities with excellents tram systems.

He goes on to say, buses are great for accessing estates and places that are off the main road (/route), since they can access areas flexibly at low cost - however, they are not very good at shifting large numbers of people down one corridor.

He gives the example of the 88 route (Bradford / Colton) as a bad example of how buses run, i.e. very uncomfortable (smelly / noisy engine, stopping starting, the rubber tyres etc.)

He says when park and ride have been available, people tend not to use it for rubber tyre vehicles, e.g. buses, but will do for steel ones, e.g. trams or trains.

He goes on to rubbish the term Superbus, as nothing more than a bus with a few cosmetic changes.

He goes through some of the claims made by First Group (promoting the bus option) and knocks all their claims down one at a time - pointing out the tram out performs on each point.

Finally he compares the danger posed by trams and buses, suggesting cyclists are at more danger from buses than from trams.

Just to run more salt into the wounds, there are also articles in the magazine about Lyon and Dublin, Lyon will have constructed 5 lines in 10years (from concept to fare paying passengers) soon, and Dublin is adding a further 6 lines to the new 3 line network over the next 10 years - they'll have gone from 0 to 9 lines in about 15years!!!

Frankfurts population is about 2 million L No. 1, with a metro of 5 million.

by the way,the population of frankfurt is arround 600.000 inhabitants, the rhein-main area (that is no "greater frankfurt") just an urban areal like the rhein-ruhr area has an population around 2 mio inhabitants.

5 million inhabitants?? the whole federal state hesse (incl. frankfurt) has 6 mio inhabitants.... its an area what is as big as wales, so no urban area...

frankfurt ist just a normal big german city. some skyscraper, ok, but with also a lot of of awfull, dirty and grey quaters - specially in the city center.... :-(

frankfurt is the economic center of germany..that is all, not a good place for living imo

All requested work completed.
Currently awaiting government decision.All the latest additional work requested by Department for Transport Minister Derek Twigg in July, has been completed.

In response to Mr Twigg's request, we have completed a further review into a high quality bus option and provided additional financial details of the local funding for the tram option. Once again the tram proved to be cost-effective and the only solution that will provide the range and level of long term benefits needed by the city and the region along the planned routes.

Thanks to the revised financial structure announced in November 2004, we have also reduced the total cost of the scheme by around £¼bn to within £25m of the original allocation.

This information is now with the Department for Transport along with a reminder to Alistair Darling that we face a deadline of March 2006 by when acquisition of the 200 plus packages of land required for the scheme needs to be complete, meaning we urgently need a positive decision on the scheme.

Once the project has been given the go-ahead, as well as purchasing the land required for the scheme, we could also commence the Best and Final Offer stage of the bidding process.

Construction of Leeds Supertram would then be likely to begin in 2008.

Construction of Leeds Supertram would then be likely to begin in 2008.

Or about 17 years behind Manchester ! :bash:

Was in the Toon las week - they have rather cool hybrid (diesle/electric) buses that do the Quay run (connecting one side of the Tyne to another from and around Newcastle City Centre). They are bright yellow and very (almost scarily) quiet!
http://www.transport2000.org.uk/images/goodpractice/QuaylinkBus.jpg

The vehicles are powered by an electric motor, while a small turbine engine is used to keep the batteries charged. The vehicle’s batteries are also charged up overnight at the depot. With a top speed of 80 kilometres per hour, an average speed of 22 kilometres per hour, and a maximum distance of 340 kilometres each day, vehicles of this type are suitable for use in virtually all city operations.

The ₤5 million project was funded with ₤3 million from local transport plan allocation, ₤1 million of regeneration funds, and ₤1 million from developer contribution. Each of the new buses, designed by New Zealand company Designline, cost around ₤250,000. This is not cheap, but Keith felt it was a price worth paying: “We wanted something that would enhance the newly regenerated areas along the quayside. A service that would be eye-catching and distinctive and could run comfortably through pedestrianised areas.”source (http://www.transport2000.org.uk/goodpractice/maintainGoodpractice.asp?GoodPracticeID=38)

I've advocated these type of buses for years (honestly). The city centre would be a much cleaner place, which it undoubtedly needs to be, without those noisy, belching diesel buses we have now. And a blue and amber colour scheme would be preferable to the limp-wristed lilac and purple ones.

:D I agree about the colour schemes!

I commute to the city on a bike at the moment, and riding behind these buses engulfed in diesel fumes is not pleasant. At least I can hear them coming up behind me!

I don't mind either colour scheme, but I do agree these buses would be excellent and certainly make the city cleaner. The problem is, looking at how big Leeds is and how many buses run in it, it would be very expensive to introduce these, so it would have to be done over a period time. However many improvements are made to the buses though I still do think the case still stands for Supertram, or an equivalent transport system.

I wasn't suggesting them as a full replacement, but the costings do seem more favourable overall, as would be the heavily reduced upheaval to the city and the already manic traffic systems. Having them in the current GreenZone (ammusing epithet) would be a vast improvement.

A minitram, such as the ones being piloted in Bradford at the moment, I think may be a good idea, but probaby invest in a different, larger model, rather than the smaller ones in Bradford.

Or about 17 years behind Manchester ! :bash:
Still, if by some miracle it went ahead, 2008 would be better than never, 17 years behind Manchester but still ahead of Liverpool, however, I still wouldn't put money on Leeds seeing Supertrams.

Well not soon

Just caught the back end of a BBC Look North report, can anyone confirm the Leeds supertram IS DEAD???

Just caught the back end of a BBC Look North report, can anyone confirm the Leeds supertram IS DEAD???
Its as good as dead, and if this isn't bad enough, according to Look North, a property developer who said he was going to build a large development in Leeds if it got its Supertram has said he won't go ahead with it if the tram gets cancelled, as seems inevitable. I wonder what that cancelled development would have been. Hope its not Criterion Place, City One, Venture Tower, the Arena or Harewood Quarter. So Leeds has lost twice. :bash: :mad2: :wallbash:

Yes I saw the whole thing. I don't know which major development it might be, but I dont think it is the arena, Venture Tower or City One. It might be the Harewood Quarter because the supertram would go along The Headrow... anyone think of any major developments on tram routes in the city centre... those are what are most in danger I think...

Yes I saw the whole thing. I don't know which major development it might be, but I dont think it is the arena, Venture Tower or City One. It might be the Harewood Quarter because the supertram would go along The Headrow... anyone think of any major developments on tram routes in the city centre... those are what are most in danger I think...
If its the Harewood Quarter - that would be a disaster, with the loss of a £600-700 million development along with the jobs, you name it - this will hold Leeds back and send it 20 years behind Manchester. :bash: And there'll be no shortage of Labour councillors in Leeds who'll be dreading the next local elections.

Well I cant do much about that... Trinity Quarter starts next year apparently...
Possible Schemes it could be?:
-Universities
-Quarry Hill
-Harewood/Eastgate Qtr. (but then John Lewis confirmed opening of a Leeds Store by 2010 here..)
-Markets redevelopment

A 'major scheme' in the eyes of the media could not be quite so major though so... hmmm

Well I cant do much about that... Trinity Quarter starts next year apparently...
Possible Schemes it could be?:
-Universities
-Quarry Hill
-Harewood/Eastgate Qtr. (but then John Lewis confirmed opening of a Leeds Store by 2010 here..)
-Markets redevelopment

A 'major scheme' in the eyes of the media could not be quite so major though so... hmmm
I wouldn't think the universities, market or Quarry Hill are so dependent on Supertram, so that leaves Harewood/Eastgate.

Yeah but then, the rest of the city centre has survived for ages without Supertram so whats to say this wouldn't...

Not really a surprise if it turns out 25th October to be this ill fated project died.

I suppose now is crunch time, there will be some very hard decisions for the PTE, what to do next.

Wonder if the DfT have promised money if the PTE go for something like parking levies/congestion charging/guided buses???

Unfortunately neither bbc.co.uk/leeds nor ypn.co.uk seem to keep themselves very up to date, if someone could please post a brief summary of any media reports in your local rag etc tomorrow I'd be very grateful.

Leeds Supertram RIP - victim of Londonfirstism. :rant: :bleep: :evil: :mad: :bash: :wallbash: :badnews: :fiddle:

for example, things to listen out for are whether or not Leeds still has the money promised back in 2001 - £335m.

If they do, then attempting to get trams going again could happen in the medium term, however, if the money is gone (i.e. not mentioned) then the PTE is in the unfortunate position of being back to square one and having to go begging for money.

Just reminds all of us how this countries transport policy is so screwed up.

If Leeds was in another country, with the type of congestion and rush hour movement of people that occurs there would be no question. The local authority would have much more control over transport funds and this would have gone ahead years ago.

A very sad day for local public transport in this country, alas, these days have been all too regular recently.

Apparently a decision will be made in days, and obviously expected to be negative. Leeds already implements everything possible on buses and trains. Congestion charing will not be introduced until a suitable and reliable alternative (Aka supertram) is introduced say the city council.

If the government announces that it will not fund the Supertram, I hope that firm plans are put in place for speedy improvements to bus lanes and park-and-rides from the cities suberbs, the city cannot afford another costly and lengthy delay to improvements to our transport network. I wonder if yesturdays hint by the YEP that the airport would be sold off, is a last ditched attempt by the council to save the supertram by way of offering a cash injection to save the scheme.

indead, I agree, but listen out for hints in the media reports that give an idea of where the DfT has been putting pressure on the PTE, they are no doubt trying to steer them towards some sort of decision.

Smartcity - good point about the airport, £40m wasn't it, have any figures about the gap in funding been given?

One thing for sure, the people of Leeds will make their fealing heard at the next General Election if the city is shunned once again!

All requested work completed.
Currently awaiting government decision.All the latest additional work requested by Department for Transport Minister Derek Twigg in July, has been completed.

In response to Mr Twigg's request, we have completed a further review into a high quality bus option and provided additional financial details of the local funding for the tram option. Once again the tram proved to be cost-effective and the only solution that will provide the range and level of long term benefits needed by the city and the region along the planned routes.

Thanks to the revised financial structure announced in November 2004, we have also reduced the total cost of the scheme by around £¼bn to within £25m of the original allocation.

This information is now with the Department for Transport along with a reminder to Alistair Darling that we face a deadline of March 2006 by when acquisition of the 200 plus packages of land required for the scheme needs to be complete, meaning we urgently need a positive decision on the scheme.

Once the project has been given the go-ahead, as well as purchasing the land required for the scheme, we could also commence the Best and Final Offer stage of the bidding process.

Construction of Leeds Supertram would then be likely to begin in 2008.

So if the airport were to be sold it would appear the outstanding amount could be paid for by the sale of the airport.

One thing for sure, the people of Leeds will make their fealing heard at the next General Election if the city is shunned once again!
And we saw what happened in parts of Greater Manchester in May. Labour had a 17,000 majority overturned in Manchester Withington, lost Rochdale, and Ruth Kelly was left hanging onto a 2,000 majority in Bolton North West.

So what could fall in the Leeds area?

Elmet, Pudsey, and Leeds North East to the Tories.

Batley and Spen Valley, Dewsbury as long shots to the Tories.

The Lib Dems could do well in the other Leeds seats, and maybe pick up seats just outside Leeds.

And there may be one or two marginals in Bradford - e.g. Keighley.

And there's the local elections.

Withington was the big one, the winning LD said the Metrolink was a major factor since it should have gone through the constituency.

.....and if the airport theory is correct they'll have money spare for something else!

£40 million for the airport ought to cover that outstanding £25 million in funding for Supertram. But that doesn't guarantee any go-ahead, and my head still says the scheme is dead.

problem with the airport theory is that the compulsary purchase orders run out in March, cannot see how they could possible do the deal of getting the 5 councils to agree the sale, then sell the aiport in time to avoid the compulsary purchases running out.

Once they run out, the scheme will die since it'll take such a long time to get them all back again.

....but it could be used as a guarantor to kick start the project?

Not how the DfT work, they will not commit funds unless everything is guarenteed, and in place - see Liverpool.

Much as it would be nice to add 2 and 2 to make 4, however, I suspect that you are making 5 or 6.

Either way it looks like the council is considering this as an option.

Leeds top speed in peak hours 19mph, getting lower each year, welcome to one of Europes most congested cities.

Well we gotta be famous for something


:banana: :banana: :banana: :banana: :banana: :banana: :banana: :banana: :banana: :banana:

Leeds is already famous for other things! In comparison, what are speeds in other cities? I'm worried Leeds will collapse without good infrastructure and be back to square one. It might end up like a modern equivalent of Bradford without infrastructure.

We've had this conversation before, and decided that there wasn't anything it was famous for internationally, unless you want to remind us No1.

The PTE will do something, whether it be improving the bus routes or something else we don't know, but they'll do something.

Something is only made famous if you care, so lets keep this thread on topic.

no but then not many cities are famous intentionally. There's only a few things in Leeds that were designed to be famous, probably less than other cities but then again, they're more famous than the 19mph fact.

www.knowhere.co.uk/545_heroes.html

Can't be arsed to look for anymore :runaway:

Trouble is, Leeds will get famous for losing a large retail development because it lost Supertram.

lol practically all the proper famous ones are missing off that! Famous for the market...

We're famous for a crap football team :)

Oh yeah, and terroists.

Sean Bean from Leeds he would love that!

We're famous for a crap football team :)

Oh yeah, and terroists.


Don't forget that international megastar..................Jimmy Saville!

If Leeds Utd can drum up support from private investors to save it, why can't the city put together something similar for the Supertram?

If Leeds Utd can drum up support from private investors to save it, why can't the city put together something similar for the Supertram?


In terms of the relevant business set up that’s like comparing chalk and cheese. Leeds Utd has all the infastruture in place, a guaranteed market of customers with a long history of support and an opportunity of instant returns on the investment, should the team get back into the Premiership (and we will be back next year!).

I don’t think you could apply the same business logic to Leeds Supertram. Surely the infrastructure has to be mainly publicly funded because any private firm borrowing the capital to build and run the thing would have crippling interest repayments to service.

ypn.co.uk has the following story (come on guys)...

£2.4bn investment plan in turmoil
Developer pulls out after Government 'dithering' over city tram scheme
William Green
Political Correspondent
A MASSIVE £2.4bn investment in Yorkshire that could help create 32,000 jobs has been put at risk because the Government is refusing to back plans for a new tram system.
Business leaders in the region fear that Transport Secretary Alistair Darling has totally ruled out funding a new Leeds Supertram network after a meeting with Tony Blair – and now a consortium of leading entrepreneurs is warning this jeopardises huge new investment, threatening not just the ongoing prosperity of the city but Yorkshire as a whole.
The scheme's future has been thrown into turmoil following a private meeting between Leeds MPs Fabian Hamilton and Hilary Benn with Tony Blair and Alistair Darling in the Prime Minister's Parliamentary office last Wednesday.
It is understood Mr Darling raised new concerns about the tram network's running costs and failed to say whether the Government was backing the project after months of avoiding making a conclusive decision – although an announcement will reportedly be made by the end of the month.
The Yorkshire Post understands Mr Darling is against going for an offer to build the tram system at the 2001 cost of £355m, with Leeds finding an additional £30m to cover increased costs.
Government money to help build the three-line system would not be accessed for three years either, while regional transport chiefs would meet upfront the cost of buying land and any additional costs.
The Government's failure to back the congestion-busting scheme could now put at risk plans by a group of investors to pump more than £2.4bn into the heart of the city amid fears that already congested roads will become "gridlocked" and its phenomenal growth drastically slowed.
The knock-on effects of losing that level of investment – and tens of thousands of new jobs – would be felt throughout the region.
Last night, Leeds North West Liberal Democrat MP Greg Mulholland said he understood one developer had already pulled out of a project as a result of the Government's dithering over the Supertram.
"We are already seeing the knock-on effect of failing to provide a 21st century transport solution for Leeds and this makes a mockery of the Government's regional economy strategy and I am afraid will hold back the economy of Leeds," he said.
Improved transport links in Leeds are vital for the city and the region, with 32,000 jobs predicted within its borders during the next decade – 70 per cent of them being filled from outside.
The expected rise in jobs represents 40 per cent of employment growth in the region.
Supporters say trams encourage more people out of cars and off congested roads than buses, with 65 per cent of people using the Manchester Metrolink having access to a car while that figure is only 10 per cent on buses.
Leeds Council leader Mark Harris said he hoped Mr Darling had not already made a negative decision and added the guarantee to build the tram network for the 2001 price was a good offer.
He said he was "extremely disappointed" that requests for a meeting had been met with complete silence from Whitehall.
Ian Williams, from the Leeds Chamber of Commerce, said the private sector was investing billions of pounds into Leeds – but public investment to support growth and business was not forthcoming.
william.green@ypn.co.uk

26 October 2005

Right, reading that

The Yorkshire Post understands Mr Darling is against going for an offer to build the tram system at the 2001 cost of £355m, with Leeds finding an additional £30m to cover increased costs./[Quote]

Very bad, seems that the £335m has been withdrawn.


[Quote]Government money to help build the three-line system would not be accessed for three years either

The DfT are not exactly pulling out all the stops to get this built - which they would have to for it to proceed.


Liberal Democrat MP Greg Mulholland said he understood one developer had already pulled out of a project

If this is true then is is the end.


"We are already seeing the knock-on effect of failing to provide a 21st century transport solution for Leeds and this makes a mockery of the Government's regional economy strategy

So true.


with 65 per cent of people using the Manchester Metrolink having access to a car while that figure is only 10 per cent on buses

Interesting comment, there is dicussion as to whether that road space is simply taken up by other users - however, this does allow the economy of that area to grow more. Darling's arguement is that a new tram line should go alongside congestion charging to ensure that freed up road space remains freed and isn't simply filled up again (as it has been over here) by people who had previously been put off by the congestion on the roads.


He said he was "extremely disappointed" that requests for a meeting had been met with complete silence from Whitehall.

I understand Darling doesn't believe meeting people 'below him' is worthwhile!!!! (Not very well put, but many people have struggled to get meetings with Darling).


Ian Williams, from the Leeds Chamber of Commerce, said the private sector was investing billions of pounds into Leeds – but public investment to support growth and business was not forthcoming.

Wonder if the PTE considered taxing those businesses that would benifit most from the trams to fund the network (not that they should have to).

metrolink

"Wonder if the PTE considered taxing those businesses that would benifit most from the trams to fund the network (not that they should have to)."

in leeds, since at least 2000, every planning application thats even remotely near to the proposed route has been subjest to a section 106 agreement. This is in no way an agreement but essentially a bribe. you give the council £ x thousand and you will get planning permission. Leeds city council has been receiving this money for years with the understanding that if the supertram does not go ahead it will be spent on 'other improvents'. The council will have a huge ammount of money in the pot which has been gathering interest for all these years.

so it would seem that the businesses have been taxed. i have also spoken to the councils in mcr and notts who both were suprised at the leeds 'agreement' and said it was something which they had never done or intended to.

Interesting, I thought I had heard something similar from a friend who used to work in the property industry over there.

Wonder what the reaction will be from those companies who have paid this 'levy' will be?

£2.4bn? Ridiculous figure, unless an aggregation of a series of development schemes. I'd understand some of the development down into Hunslet (Victoria Mills) and south of Clarencem Dock may suffer without the better connected tram network, but the other two planned branches along Otley Road and Roundhay Road are both surrounded by incredibly dense surburban housing and commercial sites anyway.

Perhaps I'm looking at it from the wrong angle, but I fail to see how a light tram network would discourage any major city central development. On the southern outskirts, perhaps, but I'm not sure what was planned in the first place?

That said, its a tragedy that something like this could be canned despite the councils efforts to ensure the 2001 costing.

The writing was on the wall as long as two years ago (October 2003) when 'The Times' reported a meeting at which the government expressed its intention not to fund new tram schemes as they are not value for money. I wrote to both WYPTE and the city council and they claimed ingorance and pooh poohed the idea that the Leeds scheme would be turned down. I asked that, in case they were wrong, was there a plan B ?
Looks as it they WERE wrong and that there isn't a plan B !

Nevertheless, this doesn't hide the fact that Leeds is getting a raw deal and does very badly for central funding compared with most other places.

I'm sad to hear that Leeds won't get its tram. Its a larger city than its neighbour, Sheffield, which has one, so surely, providing the routing is right - the costing will be offset by greater usage will it not?

Well unfourtantley this government does not use logic.

dinp - the Sheffield system has been a financial disaster, and is probably one of the reasons Leeds is struggling so much.

Probably not actually. Many people do not need to travel into Sheffield City Centre and therefore don't spend the money because of Meadowhall beign so close to the motorway network, as well as a rail interchange. In Leeds, people still need to reach the city centre and the White Rose would not have an effect as supertram is not planned to serve it. Leeds' City Centre is generally stronger and more important anyway and would more likely to have the same prosperity of the Metrolink than the Sheffield Supertram.