Leeds trolleybus scheme delayed further

Phill_dvsn · Post by **Phill_dvsn** » Thu 26 Sep, 2013 9:54 pm

raveydavey wrote: Phill_dvsn wrote: Words fail, it's been said many many times already.I think people are lost for words at the pig headed ignorance of this council.No matter what is said, the amount of opposition. The Council will force this through whatever the cost. All that remains now is to take bets on how many years it will be before people are calling for a modern transport scheme for this City. Leeds being the last major city without one.Even the incompetent council will have to conceded it is nothing more than a bus. How long, 5 years after follybus completion perhaps? Can you believe that there are already mutterings of a follybus extension, with the proposed 'retail park' at Thorpe Park being a suggested destinations? This despite the fact that that site lies right next to the railway line..?Pie in the sky, or an ambitious plan to join up two hated projects that the people of Leeds have said that they don't want? To be honest Ravey it reminds me very much of Hitler in March 1945.Moving phantom armies about still in the hope of victory during his moment of complete madness and delusion.I'm stunned at the stupidity of L.C.C. Talk of extending that ridiculous idea even before they've tested it and seen it fail is sheer stupidity.It would be like having a smashed window in your house, instead of fixing it, you go round and smash all the other windows to make them the same!

Brunel · Post by **Brunel** » Fri 27 Sep, 2013 10:49 am

Leeds Civic Trust Backs Leeds Trolleybus Scheme http://snipurl.com/27vysvj

raveydavey · Post by **raveydavey** » Fri 27 Sep, 2013 8:26 pm

Brunel wrote: Leeds Civic Trust Backs Leeds Trolleybus Scheme http://snipurl.com/27vysvj I think this has been commented on before, as has the point that Leeds Civic Trust is understood to receive funding from the council. Not that I'm saying that the two points may be linked, certainly not. What I will say is that it seems at odds with the stated aims of Leeds Civic Trust to support a scheme that will decimate large parts of a conservation area, and use architecturally splendid listed buildings as hanging points for the overhead wires. Even if they support the wider scheme, you would have thought they'd have something to say on those points, wouldn't you?

Brunel · Post by **Brunel** » Sun 29 Sep, 2013 1:10 am

Garden Grab: by the FolleyNo.2 Shire Oak Road, will lose a lot of these trees and lawn.To be replaced by a road and overhead cables.The steps leading down to the lawn shown on the plan, can be seen on the R.H. side of the photograph.http://goo.gl/maps/0SwFLFull size image here: http://imgur.com/Xvw0lkI

Brunel · Post by **Brunel** » Mon 30 Sep, 2013 1:49 pm

raveydavey wrote: There is a full page notice towards the back of todays YEP listing various works that need permission, many of them 'conservation area' works in Headingley.However, two items south of the river caught my attention. Not only content with forcing this white elephant on us in the face of overwhelming public objections, the facades of both The Adelphi and The Garden Gate are set to be butchered to "install overhead line fixings" to both buildings.You really couldn't make it up, could you? Probably that these two establishments had tram fittings previously.I also note that there are to be "fixings" bolted on to St. Anne's Cathedral, another listed building.

WiggyDiggy · Post by **WiggyDiggy** » Tue 01 Oct, 2013 2:02 pm

Brunel wrote: raveydavey wrote: There is a full page notice towards the back of todays YEP listing various works that need permission, many of them 'conservation area' works in Headingley.However, two items south of the river caught my attention. Not only content with forcing this white elephant on us in the face of overwhelming public objections, the facades of both The Adelphi and The Garden Gate are set to be butchered to "install overhead line fixings" to both buildings.You really couldn't make it up, could you? Probably that these two establishments had tram fittings previously.I also note that there are to be "fixings" bolted on to St. Anne's Cathedral, another listed building. Hang on, isnt the GG Grade II listed? Does that not count for anything?

Jogon · Post by **Jogon** » Tue 01 Oct, 2013 10:39 pm

Objections deadline is 31 October.Just done my bit.Tidal traffic flow sounds more sensible, much of the route was two lanes in and out.could have 3 lanes inbound AM or 2+bus and same for PM out.Incidentally bus lanes are 0630-0930 only inbound and 1630-1830 outbound but due to over zealous plod no one ever goes in them so it's 1 lane + empty lane in and out all day+ night, helps bus bikes tho'.http://stopthetrolleybus.com/your-area-needs-you/You can object by email online...now taster of reasonshttp://stopthetrolleybus.com/reasons-to-object/

Jogon · Post by **Jogon** » Tue 01 Oct, 2013 10:40 pm

Brunel wrote: Leeds Civic Trust Backs Leeds Trolleybus Scheme http://snipurl.com/27vysvj Amazing

BIG N · Post by **BIG N** » Tue 08 Oct, 2013 11:24 pm

Jogon wrote: Incidentally bus lanes are 0630-0930 only inbound and 1630-1830 outbound but due to over zealous plod no one ever goes in them so it's 1 lane + empty lane in and out all day+ night, Sorry Jogon but I have to disagree with you on that point, in all my years as a bus driver I have never witnessed a copper pulling anyone for using the bus lane outside the designated operating hours, in fact, very rarely have I seen anyone being pulled during operating hours.The real truth is that the majority of motorist are either ignorant of the rules or incapable of understanding simple signs informing them when they can or can't use that section of the road.

uncle mick · Post by **uncle mick** » Wed 09 Oct, 2013 7:56 am

Hope everyone has a alibi http://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/n ... -1-6126380