SkyscraperCity banner

21 - 40 of 70 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
674 Posts
You could come up with the greatest Metro system on the planet they will not give it the time of day.
And why is that? Possibly because LCC realise it's a bit more difficult to get a Metro system built than drawing a few pretty pictures. It's got to be funded, and, barring a revolutionary shift in the UK's taxation regime, that funding must come from Westminster, which means following the policies of the Treasury and DfT.

Also, can you imagine what the response would be in (say) Headingley if a monorail were proposed? The opposition to the trolleybus would be tiny in comparison.

LCC have been trying to get rapid transit systems (of some description or other) built for the past 25 years, all of which have come to nothing due to central government's "computer says no" mentality or massive local protest. Find a cheap, popular and effective form of metro system and I'm sure LCC will bite your hand off.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
674 Posts
Then they are idiots.

It's no surprise to me why some developers won't invest here.
South Bank, Thorpe Park, Kirkstall Forge etc. must just be a figment of my imagination...

Presumably you're not aware that that the current pot of transport funding from central government to which Via the M62 refers is (i) completely insufficient for any sort of metro system and (ii) must be spent by 2020/21, which is no way near enough time to get a metro designed, approved and built.
 

·
Carl Shutt ruined my life
Joined
·
829 Posts
Interesting that point 3.9 mentions that NR and WYCA have had discussions about Tram trains. Maybe the Tram Train in WY is not dead yet? :dunno:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
674 Posts
Interesting that point 3.9 mentions that NR and WYCA have had discussions about Tram trains. Maybe the Tram Train in WY is not dead yet? :dunno:
I'm sure they have had discussions. But I don't think Tram-Train technology would be particularly helpful in Leeds. It's being proposed as a 'solution' to allow a direct rail link to the airport, but AFAICS that's a solution in search of a problem. Tram-Trains have only been built in a few places - it's a niche to solve particular problems such as having a main station distant from the city centre, or making better use of underutilised heavy rail lines. Leeds does not have these problems.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,834 Posts
Tram/ Train, Monorail, Underground or whatever. It doesn't matter.


The current Leeds Council leadership have made it abundantly clear they, (apart from 3 train halts) are spending money on the buses.


You could come up with the greatest Metro system on the planet they will not give it the time of day.
That's because it isn't needed. There isn't any congestion, traffic moves freely at peak times.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,834 Posts
And why is that? Possibly because LCC realise it's a bit more difficult to get a Metro system built than drawing a few pretty pictures. It's got to be funded, and, barring a revolutionary shift in the UK's taxation regime, that funding must come from Westminster, which means following the policies of the Treasury and DfT.

Also, can you imagine what the response would be in (say) Headingley if a monorail were proposed? The opposition to the trolleybus would be tiny in comparison.

LCC have been trying to get rapid transit systems (of some description or other) built for the past 25 years, all of which have come to nothing due to central government's "computer says no" mentality or massive local protest. Find a cheap, popular and effective form of metro system and I'm sure LCC will bite your hand off.
At least some of the protests against the trolleybus was because it's a crap idea. It doesn't solve the 'pinch point' between Headingley and Hyde Park Corner. It really offers little that you can't already do with a normal bus.

A tram has similar problems in the same location.

An elevated monorail, however, would probably bring some actually useful journey time reductions.

It's a shame there isn't a way to connect a tram-train link to the Harrogate line, and run off-road into Headingley that way, but I can't really see how you could do it, at least not without some serious demolition.
 

·
Tea. Earl grey. Hot.
Joined
·
3,144 Posts
Discussion Starter #28
That's because it isn't needed. There isn't any congestion, traffic moves freely at peak times.
It's about growth and staying competitive for the future my pedigree chum.

Why would any company in the future decide to base their HQ in Leeds if Manchester, Sheffield and Liverpool have far better network connections?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
597 Posts
At least some of the protests against the trolleybus was because it's a crap idea. It doesn't solve the 'pinch point' between Headingley and Hyde Park Corner. It really offers little that you can't already do with a normal bus.

A tram has similar problems in the same location.

An elevated monorail, however, would probably bring some actually useful journey time reductions.

It's a shame there isn't a way to connect a tram-train link to the Harrogate line, and run off-road into Headingley that way, but I can't really see how you could do it, at least not without some serious demolition.
The NGT scheme did address the pinch point on Headingley Lane, and the notion there is no congestion in Leeds at peak times? You cannot be serious. The roads are gridlocked. I would have the trolleybus over the awful service provided First Bus who are on the brink of financial collapse anyday.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
674 Posts
The NGT scheme did address the pinch point on Headingley Lane, and the notion there is no congestion in Leeds at peak times? You cannot be serious. The roads are gridlocked. I would have the trolleybus over the awful service provided First Bus who are on the brink of financial collapse anyday.
I suspect cmj was being sarcastic. And yes, both the Supertram and NGT would have addressed Headingley lane by segregating the trams/buses from general traffic at-grade. It's a shame neither of them happened. Understanding why that was will be the key to developing a successful public transport system within Leeds in the future.
 

·
B*tch
Joined
·
14,893 Posts
It's about growth and staying competitive for the future my pedigree chum.

Why would any company in the future decide to base their HQ in Leeds if Manchester, Sheffield and Liverpool have far better network connections?
Because companies don't care about that. Transport within cities is not a high priority for investors. They'll be looking at other factors such as the presence of a highly educated workforce or transport connections to other cities (particularly London).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,834 Posts
The comment about not having a traffic problem and the freely moving traffic was a quote by councillor Richard Lewis in the YEP a while ago.

I though NGT mixed with the traffic on Headingley lane as there wasn't enough room for a dedicated lane (otherwise there would probably be a bus lane there now).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,552 Posts
Because companies don't care about that. Transport within cities is not a high priority for investors. They'll be looking at other factors such as the presence of a highly educated workforce or transport connections to other cities (particularly London).
I can tell you that having worked for large organisations, transport connectivity for their workforce is a very important consideration. If you go to Manchester, you will see how businesses have set up their head offices close to tram station hubs and not just in the city centre. Connectivity for their staff is so good with access to most parts of the city and beyond.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
597 Posts
I can tell you that having worked for large organisations, transport connectivity for their workforce is a very important consideration. If you go to Manchester, you will see how businesses have set up their head offices close to tram station hubs and not just in the city centre. Connectivity for their staff is so good with access to most parts of the city and beyond.
So true! There is no way MediaCityUK would have been built without Metrolink, the BBC would not have moved there if the staff had only a bus service to get them there. One of the reasons Clarence Dock was developed was because it was going to be served by trams which never arrived. Imagine Canary Wharf without a tube connection, no companies would move there.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
597 Posts
The comment about not having a traffic problem and the freely moving traffic was a quote by councillor Richard Lewis in the YEP a while ago.

I though NGT mixed with the traffic on Headingley lane as there wasn't enough room for a dedicated lane (otherwise there would probably be a bus lane there now).
NGT involved the widening of Headingley Lane on the south side at great expense as well as removing the former garage and shops at Hyde Park Corner, the single storey ones. That aspect of the scheme made a lot of sense and would have been a game changer. The problem we now face is that WYCA/Metro or whatever it calls itself this week ( an attempt to call it "Leeds City Region Transport Authority" was shot down by Bradford) has not got the nerve to do bold public transport! Rapid Transit has been shunted into a siding and we are left with a crackpot station at the Airport and a dubious promise First will transform our bus network.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,161 Posts
As someone who lives near Hyde Park Corner I can honestly tell you that needs doing so much. Them low tide shops (not so much the garage) - and even the low rise ones behind Chicini look so unkept and crap, and all of them are so close to the road meaning there's no option for widening at all!
 

·
B*tch
Joined
·
14,893 Posts
I can tell you that having worked for large organisations, transport connectivity for their workforce is a very important consideration. If you go to Manchester, you will see how businesses have set up their head offices close to tram station hubs and not just in the city centre. Connectivity for their staff is so good with access to most parts of the city and beyond.
When it comes to foreign direct investment at least, it isn't a high priority because there are so many other factors to consider when choosing somewhere to locate/invest. A company isn't going to choose somewhere like Sheffield over Bristol just because the former has a tram network and the latter doesn't.

Not to mention that London is totally different anyway - its transport system is many times better than anywhere else in the country. Trams might be better than buses, but they can't compete with a fully-functioning underground.
 
21 - 40 of 70 Posts
Top