Leeds trolleybus scheme delayed further

Cardiarms · Post by **Cardiarms** » Tue 10 Jul, 2012 1:40 pm

£16 billion has been found for Crossrail, the funding for Leeds is TBus is about 1.3% of this, even the tram would have been less than 5%. Puts it in perspective.

Squatch_11 · Post by **Squatch_11** » Tue 10 Jul, 2012 2:03 pm

I haven't once said I agree with it, or that there isn't London-centric funding, but it isn't new and it is the (current) reality. Whether it's right or wrong, none of us (unless I'm wrong and someone on here does) sits on these funding committees to understand how they come up with the approvals.

WiggyDiggy · Post by **WiggyDiggy** » Tue 10 Jul, 2012 2:33 pm

cnosni wrote: A noble cause indeed,but no matter what,you wont get me on a bike at 3 in the morning in December Perhaps not yourself but you are only 1 person (-; Time and time again people are quoted (not just in Leeds) as being reluctant to take up cycling due to the safety issue, improve the infrastucture we have and more people will cycle, reducing traffic overall for a fraction of the cost of what the electro bus will cost.

Brunel · Post by **Brunel** » Tue 10 Jul, 2012 2:39 pm

I doubt if it will be any of these.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bus_rapid_transit

Riponian · Post by **Riponian** » Tue 10 Jul, 2012 3:21 pm

From the pictures showing the space by the railway line near the Albion, if you ran tracks down that side you'd have a problem as the width of the space is now occupied by a feeder station for the overhead lines.As for playing Supertram to Wetherby, in the bits where the houses have been built on the former line, you could just resort to "street running" past their front gardens. However I don't think it would go well in the leafy villages of Bardsey and Collingham.Maybe Supertram to the Airport, but possibly that'll have proceeded to price itself itself out of the market by the time we get round to thinking about it.We're being fobbed off with this trolleybus, the only sense would be a city wide system giving an economy of scale, instead it'll be a short lived one-off. Expensive, inflexible and making no difference.

simong · Post by **simong** » Tue 10 Jul, 2012 3:26 pm

Cardiarms wrote: £16 billion has been found for Crossrail, the funding for Leeds is TBus is about 1.3% of this, even the tram would have been less than 5%. Puts it in perspective. Crossrail has been in development for thirty years or so now and it's unlikely that it would have been completed as quickly if at all without the Olympics.The huge imbalance of infrastructure funding that goes to London is appalling and is continually being ignored by central government but when local government is happy to get fobbed off with second rate solutions I can't help thinking that we get what we deserve.

Phill_dvsn · Post by **Phill_dvsn** » Tue 10 Jul, 2012 3:55 pm

Riponian wrote: From the pictures showing the space by the railway line near the Albion, if you ran tracks down that side you'd have a problem as the width of the space is now occupied by a feeder station for the overhead lines. Yes but these kind of things are minor obstacles in the wider scheme of things, no city has had a complete line fully intact, and obstacle free run to just lay track back down, the amount of earth moving and structure building is immense, but it still goes ahead. That's Manchester overcoming obstacles, I'm sure Leeds could manage to relocate a power box.

Phill_dvsn · Post by **Phill_dvsn** » Tue 10 Jul, 2012 5:54 pm

I was massively impressed with the Manchester metrolink the first time I ever travelled on it going back 15 years or more ago, and that was well before they even had half of it up and running.What I found best about it was the fact they had managed to incorporate the metrolink with both railway stations, you didn't even have to go outside to change from tram to train.At Piccadilly they utilised the arches under the station to run the tram, this then connected via stairs and escalators to the station above, a little bit like the London underground if you like, the only difference is it was all gleaming new and welcoming.At Victoria the tram just glides into the station effortlessly from street running. I've always wanted to see that happen at Leeds, and have always wondered why no one has even tried to do this whenever you see plans and proposed routes? Going on from my previous post about utilising spare track, and reinstating the Central viaduct to bring trams in from Harrogate, and the Armley, Stanningly Road and West Leeds areas, with a bit of good engineering they could run a supertram right into the station undercover. It would mean relocating a car park, but the rest of the land isn't built on at all. I can think of no better place for an integrated tram and train interchange than the large strip of land that used to be Wellington station, these days only used for car parking. These new trams turn on a sixpence, they climb pretty stiff gradients with ease, by using a viaduct similar to this to link the old Central viaduct, they can easily bring tram and train under one roof.The new viaduct built onto the old Central viaduct, gentle curves to take it over the river, and a gentle gradient to drop it down to station level and into the train station.Completely segregated traffic free tram running from the Albion pub and Harrogate line connection. The MFI buildings pictured here are long since gone, that is just a grassed area today. Using nothing more than already spare track capacity, existing disused viaduct, and one newly built viaduct extension. Now back down to station level the trams run straight into the station undercover, infact if it's built the same you wouldn't even know the station roof and structure had been extended. The tram then can rejoin street running at City Square just like it does at Manchester Victoria.As seen here of the tram entering the station from the street.Tram and train nicely working together under one roof, integrated transport at it's best, non of this is possible with T.Bus. It would mean relocating car parking spaces, but in all honesty if Leeds is trying to do away with congestion, then parking spaces in the city really isn't helping matters at all. And if they really must have car parking, then there is plenty of dead land where Monksbridge works once stood on Whitehall Road.

BLAKEY · Post by **BLAKEY** » Tue 10 Jul, 2012 7:28 pm

Riponian wrote: We're being fobbed off with this trolleybus, the only sense would be a city wide system giving an economy of scale, instead it'll be a short lived one-off. Expensive, inflexible and making no difference. Beautifully and accurately put, and exactly what I've been trying to say less clearly in reams of posting - and the parallel with the number 4 "Streetcar" sums the situation up perfectly.

raveydavey · Post by **raveydavey** » Tue 10 Jul, 2012 8:12 pm

BLAKEY wrote: Quite apart from any other issue on this particular topic I am fervently opposed to "guided busways" - firstly because they are totally un-necessary, expensive and very very unsightly, and more importantly that for around a century buses/trolleybuses have been fitted with such a system already - its called a steering wheel !! To complete the mode of operation all that is needed is a goodly supply of white paint for marking the roadways with "bus lane" - plus a few signs and priority traffic lights, and the vehicles will then continue to pick up where they should pick up - the existing pavements. No need to take expensive "field trips" to Europe and the USA for research - the occupants of the Civic Hall should just nip across to Burley Road where such a splendid system has inexpensively and miraculously transformed the outward journeys by bus, and a few yards away the Kirkstall Road masterpiece is due to open shortly. The latter is also very commendable indeed in terms of pleasing landscaping etc - as our meerkat star of the TV adverts says nowadays - SEEMPLE !! In my opinion the misguided busways are simply another sop to Worst by Metro and help maintain Worst near monopoly on services in Leeds. I've posted many tims on the subject and no doubt will again.The expense of modifying buses, training drivers etc makes it impracticable for other bus companies to join the party and Arriva soon pulled out of the York Rd / Selby Rd fiasco, meaning only Worsts buses still use it whilst Arriva, Harrogate and District, Yorkshire Coastliner all use the ordinary carriageway. A simple bus lane was all that was needed (as virtually all the inbound section is), but Metro had to spend millions on another white elephant.It's particularly galling to see ambulances and fire engines stuck in the rush hour traffic when they too could have utilised a normal bus lane too.