The following response has been sent to West Yorkshire Combined Athority on their mass transit proposals for West Yorkshire.
Leeds City Centre Options
Option L1 involves disruption to bus stops in Infirmary Street, some of which are the nearest to the rail station for the routes served (some having been relocated from Aire Street), potentially having a negative effect on bus-rail connectivity for users. The extent of any disruption is however unclear. It does not run very close to the main retail centre, except for City Square and passing the western end of Boar Lane. It is also distant from the bus station but would link to a number of bus routes in the city centre. Closure of Portland Way to general traffic may result in vehicles which are exiting Woodhouse Lane car park, when leaving the city to the west, having to make a circuitous journey, creating extra traffic on the loop road. In addition to the rail station and City Square however, the route would pass close to Leeds General Infirmary, the Town Hall, Library, Art Gallery, Millenium Square, the City Museum, O2 Academy music venue, Civic Hall, the universities and First Direct Arena.
Option L2 while being similar to L1, involves a split route requiring more wayfinding information for passengers, with added complication arising from different running times for northbound and southbound legs. While it would seemingly avoid disruption to Infirmary Street bus stops, it would affect the amenity of pedestrianised Cookridge Street.
Option L3 causes disruption to bus stops in Park Row but avoids this in Infirmary Street. Again, the extent of this is unclear. Like L1 and L2, it passes close to the rail station but is some distance from the bus station. It does however, pass closer to the main retail area than L1 or northbound L2, while still serving the civic area and LGI. It would serve broadly the same locations as L1 and L2, if a little further from the universities than L1 and northbound L2. Universities are an important objective but should still be accessible from L3. Like southbound L2, L3 would affect the amenity of Cookridge Street, perhaps especially the Cathedral. Events in Millenium Square may need revised access/exit arrangements, as at present these extend partly across Cookridge street during events. The simpler crossing of Woodhouse Lane, at the junctions of Cookridge Street and Clay Pit Lane however is an important positive feature of this route, avoiding the sharp curves of L1 and northbound L2.
Option L4 involves another split route with similar drawbacks to L2. It does not serve the civic area and LGI as well as the other route options and does not pass close to the universities. It also does not serve the First Direct Arena. It would serve more of the main retail area than the other route options however. It would pass close to the Grand Theatre, the Playhouse and closer to the bus station than the other options but changes to bus services on the Headrow may cause problems for bus users. The suggested effect on reliability of mixing with other traffic on the A61 would be a major negative factor of this option. Mass Transit should be segregated from traffic as far as is possible to maximise reliability, speed and predictability of journey times.
Conclusion: We would lean towards option L3 for its relative simplicity and for striking a balance between serving the retail and civic areas, LGI, the universities and Arena. Either L1 or its variant L2 would be our second preference.
South Leeds route options
Option L5 despite the apparently stated preference of Leeds City Council to serve Elland Road stadium, does not do this, instead largely following Dewsbury Road along the southern edge of Beeston. Though serving residential areas and being stated as having the shortest end-to-end journey time of the three south Leeds options, the route along Dewsbury Road is heavily used by general traffic and buses and this would likely have a negative effect on journey times and reliability, an already existing disincentive to use public transport, an issue which Mass Transit is supposed to address and avoid.
Option L6 like L5, involves some sharing of space with other traffic. It does however serve Elland Road stadium, which generates large numbers of potential transit users, though this is only on certain days. Traffic could though, like option L5, have an impact on reliability. Buses to/from Morley via Churwell pass Elland Road stadium and could connect with L6 in the vicinity. L6 takes a direct route from the city centre and would help with regeneration in parts of Holbeck and Beeston.
Option L7 takes the most indirect route of the three options but offers some interesting possibilities for bus connections, as well as connection with Bradford Line option B2. Bus connections could include services to/from Gelderd Road, Whitehall Road and Holbeck/Beeston centres, as well as services to/from Morley via Churwell. There is some shared running with general traffic, notably on Gelderd Road, which could be problematic. Priority measures would likely be needed as there is limited space for segregation. Gelderd Road and Lowfields Road are of course very busy when matches are taking place at Elland Road. The possibility of connecting with the Bradford Line if option B2 were also adopted, and sharing infrastructure into the city, is interesting. This, as stated, could reduce construction costs for both lines and provide connection between the two, opening up connectivity gains without the need for travel into the city centre. Both lines, if combined in this way would help regeneration in parts of Holbeck and would, running via Sweet Street, pass close to the proposed site for the British Library North project at Temple Works. For all three options in south Leeds, consideration should be given to the future possible extension towards Dewsbury and any implications for likely usage of the whole route.
Conclusion: We lean towards option L7 as it serves high population areas in Beeston, as well as serving Elland Road, potentially connecting with B2 around Domestic Road and for regeneration opportunities in Holbeck. An alternative might be a hybrid of L6 and L7. Issues around traffic on Gelderd Road in particular however would need to be addressed.
Bradford line route options
Option B1 taking the most direct route between Bradford and Leeds, does not however address the need for better connectivity for the town of Pudsey. While, of the three options, it is said to offer the joint fastest journey time between the two cities, it arguably duplicates some existing provision on the corridor. It appears to follow broadly the A647 which, perhaps especially in Bradford and Thornbury, is highly congested with other traffic, which already affects bus services, surely presenting challenges for mass transit. As the location of the proposed Southern Gateway station in Bradford, previously suggested as being the site of St James’s wholesale market, is yet to be announced, it is difficult to comment on the route to connect to Forster Square station. The map suggests this option might run via Well Street on the eastern edge of the main city centre. Any route option should ideally serve the Interchange, if that is to continue in use. This option appears to miss both the Interchange and the St James’ market site. At the other end of the line, In Leeds, this option appears to enter the city via Wellington Street, thereby serving much new office and residential development west of the centre, requiring however, construction of an additional line separate from the south Leeds route, to enter the city centre. This route would also not support regeneration in Holbeck.
Option B2 does address the aforementioned need for better connectivity for Pudsey, utilising in part the trackbed of the former Pudsey loop railway line, as well as the spare trackbed of the existing National Rail route between Bramley and Wortley, presumably with stops at a number of locations such as Gamble Hill, Armley and Wortley. Access to the rail network from Pudsey would be available at Bramley eastbound and Bradford Interchange or ‘Southern Gateway’ for Calder Valley westbound and at Forster Square for Aire/Wharfe Valley services. While the least direct route between the two city centres, there is the option of interchange with the south Leeds line, if option L7 for that line were adopted. It would support previously mentioned regeneration opportunities in Holbeck, including the Temple Works project, but would miss new developments around Wellington Street and Whitehall Road. Running via Domestic Road, B2 could also connect to the existing walking route alongside the A643 to Elland Road stadium, as well as connecting to L7 services passing the ground. The two routes could also connect here with Whitehall Road and Gelderd Road bus services for a number of potential journeys. In Bradford city centre, the route appears to serve the Interchange and run to Forster Square station by way of Market Street, thereby taking a more central route through the centre, serving both the retail and entertainment districts. It would presumably connect also to the Southern Gateway station and appears to pass close to St James’s market, a potential location for this. At the Bradford end, this route option, along with B3, might also offer potential for connection to a future Bradford – Dewsbury route, possibly via Dudley Hill, Euroway and Low Moor, adding a connection into Leeds via Pudsey from the Spen Valley for the first time since 1914, closing a significant connectivity gap and adding value to both corridors.
Option B3 is a hybrid of B1 and B2, sharing the route of B2 between Bradford and Bramley, then as B1 into Leeds, entering the city along Wellington Street. Like B2, the route would serve Pudsey, with the same apparent route through Bradford city centre to Forster Square station, serving Interchange and presumably the Southern Gateway station.
Conclusion: For the Bradford line, we lean towards option B2 for serving the town of Pudsey, thereby improving connectivity for the town, not least in the longer term as new transit routes are added. The potential connection with L7, if adopted, is also a factor, as is the opportunity to help drive regeneration in Holbeck. We would, as a second choice support B3 as it also serves Pudsey, and would bring benefits in west Leeds, albeit different ones to B2. Reference is made in respect of both B2 and B3, that there would be fewer opportunities for placemaking. While this is desirable in a scheme, it should not trump connectivity, which is the prime role of a transit system.
Future phases
Provision for future phases should be considered during final detailed design work on phase one. Original candidate corridors for phase one which were ‘sifted’ out, should follow the first phase as soon as possible eg extension from St James’s Hospital into east and north east Leeds. Also in Leeds, a short extension, or branch, to connect more closely to the universities should possibly be considered. Continuity in such projects avoids loss of knowledge gained and lessons learned during first phase construction. Corridors were sifted in part due to low usage forecasts, but corridors on a transit system cannot be looked at in isolation. As a system grows and corridors become part of a wider system, usage across the system increases. Usage of East Leeds and Bradford – Dewsbury, both ‘sifted’, would doubtless exceed original forecasts. Bradford – Dewsbury should possibly be re-imagined however and maybe combined with a first phase of the north Bradford corridor, becoming part of a cross-city line. Using Tram-Train technology This could be relatively quickly introduced between Shipley and Low Moor or Cleckheaton. At Shipley, this could initially terminate on the site of the now disused platform 1 on the west side of the station, adjacent to Station Road, though future extension to Otley would require modifications to the east side (platforms 3 and 4) to allow for Low floor vehicles as at Rotherham Central station. Other stations on the route would need the same modifications. Use of the former platform 1 site would enable services, in the short term, to turn back without compromising capacity by using through platforms until services were extended to Wharfedale. To the south, a phased extension to Dewsbury would improve connectivity, currently poor, between Dewsbury, the Mirfield area and Bradford. This, arguably, should take precedence over the extension to Dewsbury from White Rose, as it could also enhance, via Low Moor, currently very poor connectivity between Dewsbury and Halifax. As well as a cross-city line for Bradford, a Shipley – Dewsbury line would also provide an orbital connection between radial rail routes running west from Leeds – Aire and Wharfe Valley lines, Calder Valley and Trans Pennine lines. As mentioned previously, a connection between this corridor and either the B2 or B3 options via Pudsey to Leeds, would also close a significant connectivity gap. We believe Tram-Train technology, though not a WYCA preferred mode for this corridor, would be appropriate, as WYCA has mentioned the route in its Rail Strategy on the basis that it could form part of a direct rail route (with the Crigglestone line) between Bradford, Barnsley and Sheffield. We would also like to see the question of Wetherby addressed and how the town could be connected better with the rest of West Yorkshire, preferably with a rail based solution.
General points
The cost of light rail systems in the UK is, for a myriad of reasons, artificially high compared to many other countries and this needs addressing urgently. We would urge that Combined Authority Mayors press the Government to address this issue so that systems can be built more cheaply and quickly, to bring about urgently needed connectivity improvements in the regions of the UK. While we are aware that modern trams are usually off-the-peg designs from global companies, the possibility of having vehicles for the system constructed in the UK should be investigated. A mode which should be considered is very, or ultra, light rail, currently under development for Coventry, for which a working prototype has been built. This was included in the Mass Transit Vision as a potential mode for the Bradford-Dewsbury corridor and may be a suitable option for parts of the. system in West Yorkshire, perhaps including short connections to rail (or other mass transit lines), similar to the Stourbridge Shuttle, but using a Coventry style vehicle. A demonstration of VLR in West Yorkshire might be useful to evaluate its potential. Segregation from other traffic, as far as is possible, should be a guiding principle if Mass Transit is to be transformational and achieve modal shift. Reducing car traffic will also help bus services to operate more reliably. Modal integration between first phase and later corridors should be adopted where possible, avoiding lower grade options such as BRT. Such options are sometimes seen as lower cost, but this does not always apply over the medium and longer term. There should be a perceived step change for users in the experience of using public transport if modal shift is to occur at scale, supporting not only better connectivity but also our climate change commitments. While closely integrated with bus and rail, the system needs a distinct quality of its own.