£2.5bn Leeds Tram plan delayed after government review

[thejuggler]

I’ve never quite got the obsession with light rail over decent buses. The former needs lots of expensive infrastructure and maybe looks cool, but buses can be good too - if the council could bite the bullet and exclude person cars from the city centres. Clean, electric buses, all over the place, so frequent you don’t need a timetable, £2.50 a pop… we could do this tomorrow (give or take) for a pittance.

Compared to light rail a single bus has low capacity, it has steps upstairs, it has limited spaces for disabled and puschairs, it stops far to often, paying causes a queue. They get caught in all the same traffic as the cars and have to negotiate all the same junctions etc etc. Bus routes can be changed easily and are changed often.

The other positive with light rail, espcially for strangers to a city, is there is certainty on the route as you can see the rails. I took a new bus route in Leeds recently and didn't have a clue what the route actually was. Once on it we spent 20 minutes going around a housing estate to end up at a stop a few hundred metres from where I got on!

 

[Cell2025]

Exactly! And driverless too.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 29 Dec 2025 ==


But this is my point, if you get rid of cars, there is ample space for reliable buses. Which in Leeds just now is not possible because of cars, largely containing a single person, going in the same direction at the same time. The rate of progress of exiting the 'Motorway city of the 70s' mantra (I kid you not) is taking far too long. We've only just pedestrianised (half-heartedly) City Square, after 20 years of thinking about it. There's no reason* to use a car to get in and out of the city centre. Like someone else noted above though, we'd need much improved cross-city buses to make useful links, e.g. turn it into a classic orb web.

It does depend what you mean by 'the city centre'.

The bus service is as bad as hourly after 9pm, and trains are intensely specific to the places they serve. And Bramley station isn't in Bramley, but located nearer the ring road and a supermarket. Headingley is a mile from Headingley centre. Horsforth is a mile from where a lot of the shops and restaurants are.

Leeds is expanding to the point that 'city centre' is a loose term. My wife goes to choir about a mile out of the city centre. She literally couldn't work, eat, and get there in time by public transport. And getting back would involve a horrible dark walk back from Bramley station in an area where it would be easy to be attacked. Even I don't do it. And she'd get home after midnight, all for a ten mile round trip.

So car it is.

 

[WillC]

It does depend what you mean by 'the city centre'.

The bus service is as bad as hourly after 9pm, and trains are intensely specific to the places they serve. And Bramley station isn't in Bramley, but located nearer the ring road and a supermarket. Headingley is a mile from Headingley centre. Horsforth is a mile from where a lot of the shops and restaurants are.

Leeds is expanding to the point that 'city centre' is a loose term. My wife goes to choir about a mile out of the city centre. She literally couldn't work, eat, and get there in time by public transport. And getting back would involve a horrible dark walk back from Bramley station in an area where it would be easy to be attacked. Even I don't do it. And she'd get home after midnight, all for a ten mile round trip.

So car it is.

Sure, right now there’s a good reason people drive in Leeds. But it doesn’t have to be like that. It just needs vision. Many Euro cities have abandoned cars for very good public transport. It works.

 

[NCT]

Feel like a first step for Leeds would be bus reregulation, so Leeds' bus network would be at least as good as that of Nottingham's.

(Nottingham's buses aren't regulated, but the city network being council owned achieves the same, if not better result)

 

[Cell2025]

Feel like a first step for Leeds would be bus reregulation, so Leeds' bus network would be at least as good as that of Nottingham's.

(Nottingham's buses aren't regulated, but the city network being council owned achieves the same, if not better result)

If you mean similar to the Bee Network in Greater Manchester then buses are supposedly being franchised from 2027. The promises are humungous, the outcome subject to huge public cynicism with fears of more broken promises.

https://www.wymetro.com/introducing-the-weaver-network-a-new-era-for-travel-in-west-yorkshire/

Brabin has, unfortunately for the region, been seen to be a bag of wind. The communication or lack of it over the ludicrous White Rose station being a totem of incompetence.

 

[NCT]

Has the project moved on from 'lines on maps' options for the Bradford and South lines (as per September 2024 consultation)? On-street sections aren't rail projects - they are road projects. Are there detailed drawings of road and junction modifications with road markings and property access routes? Platforms with pedestrian crossings designed? Where running along the railway, physical and operational interfaces clearly worked out? Do we even have proposed stop locations for each option? If the answers are no, then the 'early 2030s' aspiration has already passed.

 

[Cell2025]

Sure, right now there’s a good reason people drive in Leeds. But it doesn’t have to be like that. It just needs vision. Many Euro cities have abandoned cars for very good public transport. It works.

It needs many billions, it needs current transport systems and roads o be ripped up, and it would be blocked at every avenue by the planning process and objections.

In short it's a pipe dream. The current plans for a limited portion of tram services aren't due to be delivered for another 15 years so a root and branch renewal of transport systems that draws Bradford and other towns/cities into it could easily take it into the next century, and no-one is going to fund that. We will continue to chase our tail and expand the city without providing it with a viable mass transport system.

As discussed elsewhere even our station can't cope with an escalator being out of action due to the utter inadequacy of the lift and platform infrastructure. That, and a seemingly never ending increase in the amount of luggage that people seem determined to lug around with them for reasons unknown, means that we'll always be playing catch up.

This doesn't mean that nothing should be done, but equally in a city that doesn't have a massive number of cyclists using the expansive infrastructure provided, simply restricting car drivers' flexibility on its own can't be far off its limit. In short, we're in a pickle, one that was foreseeable decades ago.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 29 Dec 2025 ==

Has the project moved on from 'lines on maps' options for the Bradford and South lines (as per September 2024 consultation)? On-street sections aren't rail projects - they are road projects. Are there detailed drawings of road and junction modifications with road markings and property access routes? Platforms with pedestrian crossings designed? Where running along the railway, physical and operational interfaces clearly worked out? Do we even have proposed stop locations for each option? If the answers are no, then the 'early 2030s' aspiration has already passed.

From memory, no is the answer, and yet Brabin said 'spades in the ground' by 2028. I think I might get to see the completion of the new West Stand at Elland Road before they even put the provision of spades out to competitive tender, yet alone actually digging into concrete.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 29 Dec 2025 ==

BTW, this is the release put out by Brabin when the Weaver Network was announced, seven months ago. IT's not taken long to look like hot air.

Weaver Network will offer made to measure public transport for West Yorkshire

A bold new era for public transport in West Yorkshire is set to begin, with the unveiling of the Weaver Network by regional leaders today.

www.westyorks-ca.gov.uk

Specifically...

"The new brand was officially unveiled by Mayor Tracy Brabin and West Yorkshire's five council leaders at Millennium Square in Leeds this morning (Monday 12 May).

To be cost effective, the brand will be gradually introduced, starting with existing planned replacements at bus stops and stations. The branding will then be rolled out further when buses are taken under local control from 2027, before being included on the planned West Yorkshire tram system, for which construction work will start in 2028."

 

[WillC]

It needs many billions, it needs current transport systems and roads o be ripped up, and it would be blocked at every avenue by the planning process and objections.

In short it's a pipe dream. The current plans for a limited portion of tram services aren't due to be delivered for another 15 years so a root and branch renewal of transport systems that draws Bradford and other towns/cities into it could easily take it into the next century, and no-one is going to fund that. We will continue to chase our tail and expand the city without providing it with a viable mass transport system.

As discussed elsewhere even our station can't cope with an escalator being out of action due to the utter inadequacy of the lift and platform infrastructure. That, and a seemingly never ending increase in the amount of luggage that people seem determined to lug around with them for reasons unknown, means that we'll always be playing catch up.

This doesn't mean that nothing should be done, but equally in a city that doesn't have a massive number of cyclists using the expansive infrastructure provided, simply restricting car drivers' flexibility on its own can't be far off its limit. In short, we're in a pickle, one that was foreseeable decades ago.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 29 Dec 2025 ==


From memory, no is the answer, and yet Brabin said 'spades in the ground' by 2028. I think I might get to see the completion of the new West Stand at Elland Road before they even put the provision of spades out to competitive tender, yet alone actually digging into concrete.

The reason cycling hasn’t reached its potential is the same as buses - saturation with inefficient cars. It wouldn’t cost a lot to remove the latter. At least in monetary terms; politically very much so. A predictable pickle indeed.

 

[Cell2025]

The reason cycling hasn’t reached its potential is the same as buses - saturation with inefficient cars. It wouldn’t cost a lot to remove the latter. At least in monetary terms; politically very much so. A predictable pickle indeed.

I disagree. A lot of money was spent on the Bradford to Leeds cycle route but it is largely unused. Possibly because it goes up and down as is consistent with such an undulating environment. Mentioning Holland as a comparator is laughable...

Councillor questions CityConnect cyclist usage - West Leeds Dispatch

By Chris Young, local democracy reporter A COUNCILLOR has questioned why more cyclists aren’t using the dedicated cycle routes linking Bradford and Leeds. Councillor Riaz Ahmed (Lib Dem, Bradford Moor) […]

westleedsdispatch.com

 

[WillC]

Oh the ‘super-highway’… yes, sadly an initially decent design watered down to a fairly grotty and disjointed mess. Bits of it are good, but super overall it ain’t. Some of the more recent cycle infrastructure shows more promise (e.g. A65 out past the university). Leeds isn’t Holland, but plenty of other non-Holland cities have made good progress in replacing cars with public transport, cycling and walking. It can work well if you commit to it.

 

[tbtc]

To speed up delivery of the project, WYCA had hoped to plan the detail of the route while also submitting the business case for the system to the government, but it has now agreed to separate those two elements of the process

^^ that's the text in the OP that matters

Before doing the knee jerk thing of moaning about Westminster/ comparing Leeds to much more 'enlightened' Continental cities etc, just consider that this project is being delayed because West Yorkshire are wanting the money before they've actually worked out what they want the money for

There's been decades of previous attempts/ false starts etc, but there's still no actual concrete plans on where precisely the concrete will go, other than a vague 'we'd better be seen to tick a box by having it run to Bradford too, and maybe one of the Hospitals'

I'd want more than that if I were writing the cheque in Central Government

The current proposed scheme's rationale seems dubious, and at least partly based on the feeling that West Yorkshire ought to have a light rail system as most other metropolitan areas in Britain already have one. Other than providing a rail service to St James's Hospital, the proposed network doesn't serve any other key points that either merit a rail link or don't already have or will have one

Agreed

I'd like Leeds to have a successful network, I'd like anywhere capable of sustaining one to have the same, but a project needs more than the guilt/envy of 'everyone else has one so we deserve a mega-project'

Tram routes in the UK have typically achieved modal shift from cars of 20-30% while the Glider bus route in Belfast achieved 8-9% modal shift. Glider was far cheaper to implement though so basically you get what you pay for

That seems reasonable. You could have a 'Glider' much faster and much sooner, though without the same success (or the same costs/ delays)

It partly depends on the area as well - a corridor like Headingley needs a frequent service from the city centre along Otley Road but then fans off into less frequent routes ( Adel, Holt Park, Tinshill, Horsforth etc) - a tram couldn't tick all of those boxes without significant expense

Exactly! And driverless too.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 29 Dec 2025 ==


But this is my point, if you get rid of cars, there is ample space for reliable buses. Which in Leeds just now is not possible because of cars, largely containing a single person, going in the same direction at the same time. The rate of progress of exiting the 'Motorway city of the 70s' mantra (I kid you not) is taking far too long. We've only just pedestrianised (half-heartedly) City Square, after 20 years of thinking about it. There's no reason* to use a car to get in and out of the city centre. Like someone else noted above though, we'd need much improved cross-city buses to make useful links, e.g. turn it into a classic orb web.

The problem is that Leeds has the M621 taking people from the south side close to the city centre, and the A58(M) along the north of the city centre

The reason buses 'struggle' in cities like Leeds/ Glasgow and 'succeed' in Edinburgh/ Nottingham isnt just public ownership (Warrington would be utopia if so, Halton too!) - Leeds/ Glasgow spent a lot of money on these urban motorways, giving car drivers a much faster route into the city centre than a bus

Compare a journey from the south western suburb of Morley into Leeds ( driving your car along the M621 much faster than the 51/52 route) to a journey from the south western suburb of Balerno into Edinburgh (driving along the same road as the 44 bus, so less of a time advantage)

First aren't perfect but they're competing in Leeds with one arm behind their back

 

[NCT]

The more I look at it the more the Leeds line makes no sense.

The Dewsbury Road option has too much non-segregated running on a 2-lane road. Trams only get a step change in attractiveness over buses when the entire route is substantially segregated from general traffic - like Nottingham's network.

The Elland Road / Ring Road option doesn't serve any existing population.

The Beeston option is a street running disaster.

These aren't three variants. These are three entirely different schemes with completely different sets of drivers for change. The Dewsbury Road and Beeston options will only achieve 'buses on rails' performance and I'd be shocked if they got BCRs of anywhere near 1. The Ring Road option only makes sense if there is a high-density development masterplan.

 

[anothertyke]

If a tram is the solution, what is the problem?

Capacity relief to Leeds City station and approaches?
Lower cost substitute for heavy rail (Bury type case)?
Accessibility to very high value locations (Canary Wharf type case)?
Significant quality upgrade and congestion relief on high density bus corridor?
Re-create the city region as a series of nodes on an E/W axis?

Not convinced the scheme will wash its face under any of these headings. I agree with the comment that there needs to be a credible business case but before that is there really a coherent vision statement setting out what we are trying to do/enabling?

 

[NCT]

Quite. For instance, the three options for the Leeds Line respond to vastly different strategic cases.

I remain of the view that for Leeds, the first step is some form of motorist charging (congestion charge or workplace parking levy), to improve bus speeds and frequencies (especially evenings) to Nottingham levels. Over the longer term I'd go as far as de-motorising sections of the M621.

There is a place for trams but I don't believe the chosen corridors are it. I think the best corridors are
- Middleton via Belle Isle
- Seacroft via Easterley Road (Roundhay Road soft segregation should be just about manageable)
- Crossgates and Thorpe Park via York Road

All of these corridors have wide roads with central reservations so could deliver step improvements in speeds and reliability relative to buses.

In addition to delivering conventional transport benefits, the strategic case would include urban regeneration (mixed-use continental density developments) at Hunslet and the various retail park sites.

 

[Grimsby town]

If a tram is the solution, what is the problem?

Capacity relief to Leeds City station and approaches?
Lower cost substitute for heavy rail (Bury type case)?
Accessibility to very high value locations (Canary Wharf type case)?
Significant quality upgrade and congestion relief on high density bus corridor?
Re-create the city region as a series of nodes on an E/W axis?

Not convinced the scheme will wash its face under any of these headings. I agree with the comment that there needs to be a credible business case but before that is there really a coherent vision statement setting out what we are trying to do/enabling?

The Centre for Cities seem to have quietly clearly identified a problem that British cities face. Our cities have poor productivity compared to other developed cities and that at least partly results from lower populations with 30 minutes of the productive city areas. There's two ways to solve that, build more densely and reduce journeys times/improve reliability. A tram system can lead to both outcomes.

I'm a big believer that the law of diminishing marginal returns is one of the biggest issues in transport and economics. Because Leeds doesn't have many options for fast and frequent transport, it doesn't really matter where the tram lines are built as long as they are quick and reliable. It will stimulate surpressed economic development along those corridors and encourage people divert from other travel corridors e.g. through park and ride at stops. Development in Manchester grew around Metrolink, if it had been built on an alternative route e.g. from Salford Crescent into Manchester, development would likely have occurred there instead. Obviously if a tram route is built from Salford Crescent now, it would be competing against more development near Cornbrook and in Salford Quays, so more analysis needs to be done to ensure that a line is viable, once multiple lines are built.

Obviously there needs to be some scheme development and option testing, but the insistence that the scheme has to go through a full business case process pretty ridiculous. There's a reason every other city of Leeds' size has a rapid transit system and that is because its feasible to operate rapid transit in a city that size.

 

[AlastairFraser]

That seems reasonable. You could have a 'Glider' much faster and much sooner, though without the same success (or the same costs/ delays)

The only issue is that many corridors have achieved near bus saturation in WY, and even with the increased capacity of articulated buses, you're going to reach a point where you either run out of road capacity or drivers.

Sure, right now there’s a good reason people drive in Leeds. But it doesn’t have to be like that. It just needs vision. Many Euro cities have abandoned cars for very good public transport. It works.

Leeds isn't designed for any form of public transport to dominate and you would need decades to change that, but you can make steps in the right direction, especially with orbital travel.
A limited stop bus solution following the ring road + M621 and with bus priority measures where needed (e.g. proper segregated bus lanes, bus priority signals, slip roads to dedicated interchanges with conventional services) could work well to attract car drivers away from suburb to suburb travel, and then you can focus on light rail for the busiest radial corridors that really need it.

If a tram is the solution, what is the problem?

Capacity relief to Leeds City station and approaches?
Lower cost substitute for heavy rail (Bury type case)?
Accessibility to very high value locations (Canary Wharf type case)?
Significant quality upgrade and congestion relief on high density bus corridor?
Re-create the city region as a series of nodes on an E/W axis?

Not convinced the scheme will wash its face under any of these headings. I agree with the comment that there needs to be a credible business case but before that is there really a coherent vision statement setting out what we are trying to do/enabling?

Perhaps the initial routes should focus on connecting the 2 biggest cities to key infrastructure like LBA e.g. Bradford - Eccleshill - Ravenscliffe - Apperley Bridge - Yeadon - LBA and Leeds - Uni - Headingley - Cookridge - LBA - Yeadon - Guiseley.
Those are routes that only a tram can provide enough capacity on at the right price (if money was no object, you'd go for an automated light metro as described in Rennes above).

 

[anothertyke]

The Centre for Cities seem to have quietly clearly identified a problem that British cities face. Our cities have poor productivity compared to other developed cities and that at least partly results from lower populations with 30 minutes of the productive city areas. There's two ways to solve that, build more densely and reduce journeys times/improve reliability. A tram system can lead to both outcomes.

Actually I do buy that story although I would like to know how well it is supported in Nottingham, Sheffield, Rochdale and Oldham. The issues for me are--- given that there is heavy rail between Garforth, Cross Gates, Leeds, New Pudsey and Bradford, where is the potential to add value and transform? Maybe there are some intermediate locations like Thorp Park/Colton, but I wonder how much the proposed line will actually improve accessibility either to the city centre or to suburban hubs.

Obviously there are other corridors where segregated track would make a difference. The most obvious is the Headingley corridor, but we have been there at least twice and failed against intense local opposition.

First question is--does the scheme make strategic sense in the economic geography of Leeds City region?

 

[Andyh82]

I wasn’t massively in support of the route to Bradford. I think Brabin is in cahoots with the leader of Bradford council Susan Hinchcliffe and therefore everything has to involve Bradford in some way, probably for political reasons

 

[urbophile]

Not surprised. Never been convinced by the network as proposed. The economically sensible thing would be to metrofy the heavy rail routes - get rid of the LNER extensions and run all lines as identical stopping pattern high(er) frequency. There's room to the north of the existing Leeds station and western approaches for relatively inexpensive additional terminating platforms and approach tracks if required.

But there are very few existing heavy rail routes in Leeds or much of the rest of the conurbation. A city with the size and heft of Leeds, anywhere else in Europe, would have had a large and efficient metro system years ago.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I remember David Cameron getting caught on mic after a meeting of West Yorkshire Council leaders saying something like "I knew they hated us but I didn’t realise they hated each other more." It got an angry reaction because it was too close to the truth. Greater Manchester got investment under the Tories because of a joint local front, holding their nose with the Tories and because Greater Manchester had built up a good reputation on development. The other major cities in the North missed one or all of these factors. Greater Manchester managed to build momentum to the extent that it became self sustaining. The gross value added of Greater Manchester was 18% below the UK average in 2016 but will probably exceed the average in 2028. I think the mistake was to try a dedicated tram line first rather than pick a heavy rail line for tram trains. A South Wales Metro style network would have been easier to get funding for. The proposal should have been less than a mile of street running and a depot to kick the can down the road with Leeds station capacity. An incremental approach to building a proper network could have gone from there.

There's certainly things West Yorkshire can learn from Greater Manchester, but only up to a point. Manchester (the city) is fairly central to the wider Greater Manchester region as well as being the obvious economic hub, so it's much more practical to do things like linking rail or tram services from one side of the "main" centre to the other. Leeds is not slap bang in the middle of West Yorkshire but stuck over to the north-east, meaning that intra-regional travel into the city is heavily weighted towards the south and west. In that sense it's more like a coastal city such as Newcastle or Liverpool. Some of this is down to where the boundaries were drawn generations ago (and there's no reason those boundaries couldn't be moved, in theory), but it does also mean that the areas to the north and east of Leeds are much more rural and sparsely populated. This is also reflected in where the heavy rail routes that survived go.

Manchester having got started on its tram/light-rail system thirty years ago also helps. It's much easier to make a case for expanding a system that's already demonstrated its regeneration potential, than it is to start from scratch. Getting those first routes right is also important because that sets the tone for whether the system is viewed as an asset or a white elephant. West Yorkshire (and particularly Leeds and the immediate surroundings) doesn't have any obvious heavy rail routes to consider to be converted to trams or light-rail. Manchester had the Bury line (with its non-standard electrification and aging rolling stock) and the Altrincham line which fed into an already congested heavy-rail corridor. The most obvious candidate in West Yorkshire is the Ilkley line which, with it's relatively modern equipment and rolling stock, is a much harder sell for conversion even with the promise of increased frequencies.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 Dec 2025 ==

If you mean similar to the Bee Network in Greater Manchester then buses are supposedly being franchised from 2027. The promises are humungous, the outcome subject to huge public cynicism with fears of more broken promises.

https://www.wymetro.com/introducing-the-weaver-network-a-new-era-for-travel-in-west-yorkshire/

Brabin has, unfortunately for the region, been seen to be a bag of wind. The communication or lack of it over the ludicrous White Rose station being a totem of incompetence.

If only someone could have forseen that electing a soap-opera actress as mayor would result in a lot of fluff and very little substance...

Though in Ms Brabin's defence, the White Elephant debacle wasn't begun on her watch.

 

[tbtc]

The more I think about this, the more I'd be tempted to ignore Leeds altogether (for now)

What about Baildon - Shipley - Bradford - Odsel - Oakenshaw - Cleckheaton - Hevkmondwicke - Dewsbury - Ossett - Wakefield Westgate - Wakefield Kirkgate?

That would mean...

. Losing the current railway line from Shipley to Bradford (high frequency trams instead, significantly simplifying the current train services)

. Replacing Forster Square with an equivalent street level tram stop, and a more central stop in central Bradford

. Repurposing the Manchester Road busway

. Giving a rail-based link to some of the largest towns in West Yorkshire that currently lack one (Heckmondwicke, Cleckheaton, Ossett)

. Linking Dewsbury train station to the proper town centre

. Linking Westgate and Kirkgate in Wakefield

Then, focus on a Leeds scheme for Leeds, rather than having it tied to a Bradford project

If a tram is the solution, what is the problem?

Capacity relief to Leeds City station and approaches?
Lower cost substitute for heavy rail (Bury type case)?
Accessibility to very high value locations (Canary Wharf type case)?
Significant quality upgrade and congestion relief on high density bus corridor?
Re-create the city region as a series of nodes on an E/W axis?

Not convinced the scheme will wash its face under any of these headings. I agree with the comment that there needs to be a credible business case but before that is there really a coherent vision statement setting out what we are trying to do/enabling?

Agreed

People seem desperate for their solution here without working out what the problem actually is

Manchester had two central stations without a direct rail link, plus two 'suburban' branch lines with expired electrification/ rolling stock. Those add up to a good case

Leeds already had one big central station (so no link needed), there are no branches you'd really consider for tram conversion (the Harrogate loop is a long way for light rail, the Shipley Triangle had freight plus Carlisle/ Lancaster trains - I don't think you could separate Ilkley from the others?)

You couldn't decouple a route like Pontefract since it similarly shares the line with freight/ longer distance trains - so I'm struggling to think of any existing routes that would be suitable or any mothballed/ disused lines (like the Meadowhall branch of Sheffield Supertram or most of the Midland Metro's initial formation)

Because Leeds doesn't have many options for fast and frequent transport, it doesn't really matter where the tram lines are built as long as they are quick and reliable. It will stimulate surpressed economic development along those corridors and encourage people divert from other travel corridors e.g. through park and ride at stops

It's hard to argue against the supreme optimism of 'build it and they will come' but we need we need more than just this

There's a reason every other city of Leeds' size has a rapid transit system and that is because its feasible to operate rapid transit in a city that size.

In many Continental cases, it's because they never dug up their old lines

But since Leeds did, we need some kind of business case to justify the expense of building brand new lines

Perhaps the initial routes should focus on connecting the 2 biggest cities to key infrastructure like LBA e.g. Bradford - Eccleshill - Ravenscliffe - Apperley Bridge - Yeadon - LBA and Leeds - Uni - Headingley - Cookridge - LBA - Yeadon - Guiseley.
Those are routes that only a tram can provide enough capacity on at the right price (if money was no object, you'd go for an automated light metro as described in Rennes above).

That sounds a good idea, linking the busy Headingley corridor, the clear destination of the Airport, huge areas of Bradford and Leeds without heavy rail

I wasn’t massively in support of the route to Bradford. I think Brabin is in cahoots with the leader of Bradford council Susan Hinchcliffe and therefore everything has to involve Bradford in some way, probably for political reasons

Yup, it's the big problem with Mayors

Here in SY, Coppard is having to commit a lot of public funds to the Airport project because he has to be seen to stand up for Doncaster (rather than just Sheffield)

Brabin wants to spend the money on Leeds. Leeds seemingly had the best case (or at least the most voters), but she can't ignore Bradford, so had to try to find some 'solution' that involves them too

 

[Chester1]

There's certainly things West Yorkshire can learn from Greater Manchester, but only up to a point. Manchester (the city) is fairly central to the wider Greater Manchester region as well as being the obvious economic hub, so it's much more practical to do things like linking rail or tram services from one side of the "main" centre to the other. Leeds is not slap bang in the middle of West Yorkshire but stuck over to the north-east, meaning that intra-regional travel into the city is heavily weighted towards the south and west. In that sense it's more like a coastal city such as Newcastle or Liverpool. Some of this is down to where the boundaries were drawn generations ago (and there's no reason those boundaries couldn't be moved, in theory), but it does also mean that the areas to the north and east of Leeds are much more rural and sparsely populated. This is also reflected in where the heavy rail routes that survived go.

Manchester having got started on its tram/light-rail system thirty years ago also helps. It's much easier to make a case for expanding a system that's already demonstrated its regeneration potential, than it is to start from scratch. Getting those first routes right is also important because that sets the tone for whether the system is viewed as an asset or a white elephant. West Yorkshire (and particularly Leeds and the immediate surroundings) doesn't have any obvious heavy rail routes to consider to be converted to trams or light-rail. Manchester had the Bury line (with its non-standard electrification and aging rolling stock) and the Altrincham line which fed into an already congested heavy-rail corridor. The most obvious candidate in West Yorkshire is the Ilkley line which, with it's relatively modern equipment and rolling stock, is a much harder sell for conversion even with the promise of increased frequencies.

Manchester definitely has a fortunate geography but the good co-operation between the councils and with central government help. My impression of Merseyside local government is that they saw interaction with a Tory government as zero sum and that is damaging over a 14 year period. West Yorkshire's councils need to work together better.

Bradford Forster Square, Skipton and Ilkley to Leeds would be suitable for something comparable with the South Wales Metro. Lancaster and Carlisle trains could start from Forster Square. It would more or less just need rolling stock, a depot and street sections built i.e. Leeds and Bradford. The business case could heavily rest of diverting a significant number of trains from Leeds station and providing a cross Bradford link. 10 tph doing Interchange -Forster Square - Leeds would have sufficient capacity if limit of street running is pushed (in Manchester that is 60m sets). I suspect the biggest problem would be a loss of status i.e tram trains instead of "proper" trains, loss of London services and downgrading of Forster Square into a tram station with a couple of "real trains" per hour. Re-purposing existing lines would cut the cost to a few hundred million from £2.5bn and get the ball rolling.

The more I think about this, the more I'd be tempted to ignore Leeds altogether (for now)

What about Baildon - Shipley - Bradford - Odsel - Oakenshaw - Cleckheaton - Hevkmondwicke - Dewsbury - Ossett - Wakefield Westgate - Wakefield Kirkgate?

That would mean...

. Losing the current railway line from Shipley to Bradford (high frequency trams instead, significantly simplifying the current train services)

. Replacing Forster Square with an equivalent street level tram stop, and a more central stop in central Bradford

. Repurposing the Manchester Road busway

. Giving a rail-based link to some of the largest towns in West Yorkshire that currently lack one (Heckmondwicke, Cleckheaton, Ossett)

. Linking Dewsbury train station to the proper town centre

. Linking Westgate and Kirkgate in Wakefield

Then, focus on a Leeds scheme for Leeds, rather than having it tied to a Bradford project



Agreed

People seem desperate for their solution here without working out what the problem actually is

Manchester had two central stations without a direct rail link, plus two 'suburban' branch lines with expired electrification/ rolling stock. Those add up to a good case

Leeds already had one big central station (so no link needed), there are no branches you'd really consider for tram conversion (the Harrogate loop is a long way for light rail, the Shipley Triangle had freight plus Carlisle/ Lancaster trains - I don't think you could separate Ilkley from the others?)

You couldn't decouple a route like Pontefract since it similarly shares the line with freight/ longer distance trains - so I'm struggling to think of any existing routes that would be suitable or any mothballed/ disused lines (like the Meadowhall branch of Sheffield Supertram or most of the Midland Metro's initial formation)



It's hard to argue against the supreme optimism of 'build it and they will come' but we need we need more than just this



In many Continental cases, it's because they never dug up their old lines

But since Leeds did, we need some kind of business case to justify the expense of building brand new lines



That sounds a good idea, linking the busy Headingley corridor, the clear destination of the Airport, huge areas of Bradford and Leeds without heavy rail




Yup, it's the big problem with Mayors

Here in SY, Coppard is having to commit a lot of public funds to the Airport project because he has to be seen to stand up for Doncaster (rather than just Sheffield)

Brabin wants to spend the money on Leeds. Leeds seemingly had the best case (or at least the most voters), but she can't ignore Bradford, so had to try to find some 'solution' that involves them too

The more I have have read about the scheme the more it looks to be driven by Leeds being the largest city in Europe without a metro than about specific needs. Leeds effectively has a Metro through the scale of its commuter rail network. The government isn’t going to write a check for £2.5bn because Leeds lacks a status symbol.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

The more I think about this, the more I'd be tempted to ignore Leeds altogether (for now)

What about Baildon - Shipley - Bradford - Odsel - Oakenshaw - Cleckheaton - Hevkmondwicke - Dewsbury - Ossett - Wakefield Westgate - Wakefield Kirkgate?

That would mean...

. Losing the current railway line from Shipley to Bradford (high frequency trams instead, significantly simplifying the current train services)

. Replacing Forster Square with an equivalent street level tram stop, and a more central stop in central Bradford

. Repurposing the Manchester Road busway

. Giving a rail-based link to some of the largest towns in West Yorkshire that currently lack one (Heckmondwicke, Cleckheaton, Ossett)

. Linking Dewsbury train station to the proper town centre

. Linking Westgate and Kirkgate in Wakefield

Then, focus on a Leeds scheme for Leeds, rather than having it tied to a Bradford project

To an extent I agree that Leeds is a more difficult problem to solve, so it would make sense to prioritise the other boroughs. Leeds may be "the largest city in Europe without a Metro" but it does have decent suburban rail that is a de-facto metro.
However some of these suggestions seem a bit like solutions in need of a problem- in particular the idea of linking the two stations in Wakefield: Kirkgate and Westgate are already linked by one train per hour, which isn't exactly "turn up and go" but I'm not convinced there's a need for that outside of urbanist crayoning. There's already a free bus that links the stations more frequently, and this could easily be duplicated by one doing the circuit in the opposite direction. Linking the separate stations in towns/cities that have two (or more) shouldn't be the tail that wags the dog of providing a useful transport network. It's a bit like the Bradford thing- linking the stations appeals to transport nerds but wouldn't necessarily be of much benefit to the economy of the city itself- it's more important to get people into the city than to make it easier for them to pass through it unhindered.

The Bradford to Wakefield via Heck/Cleck/Ossett idea would be a decent shout for a "not Leeds" route, and is broadly speaking similar to Arriva Yorkshire's 268 route. There's a disused railway that's mostly available to use, too.

Bradford Forster Square, Skipton and Ilkley to Leeds would be suitable for something comparable with the South Wales Metro. Lancaster and Carlisle trains could start from Forster Square. It would more or less just need rolling stock, a depot and street sections built i.e. Leeds and Bradford. The business case could heavily rest of diverting a significant number of trains from Leeds station and providing a cross Bradford link. 10 tph doing Interchange -Forster Square - Leeds would have sufficient capacity if limit of street running is pushed (in Manchester that is 60m sets). I suspect the biggest problem would be a loss of status i.e tram trains instead of "proper" trains, loss of London services and downgrading of Forster Square into a tram station with a couple of "real trains" per hour. Re-purposing existing lines would cut the cost to a few hundred million from £2.5bn and get the ball rolling.

I can't see Bradford Council being on board with losing the London services, but if Forster Square couldn't take the LNER trains there isn't capacity to send them into Interchange either- so there would only be the handful of Grand Central services left. There's definitely an argument that connections at Leeds are adequate, but that won't wash with the council.

The Leeds branches of the Airedale & Wharfedale lines aren't great candidates for conversion in my book- they're already high quality services that predominantly serve wealthy areas so there's not much in the way of "regeneration" potential. It's the same problem as the idea of using the Glossop/Hadfield line as Greater Manchester's "tram-train" trial- even with the increased frequency it would be seen as a downgrade in some ways, and wouldn't bring any underserved areas into the network. There's maybe an argument for the Bradford legs, but they'd have to be high-floor tram-trains to share the infrastructure with the remaining heavy rail.

 

[Chester1]

I can't see Bradford Council being on board with losing the London services, but if Forster Square couldn't take the LNER trains there isn't capacity to send them into Interchange either- so there would only be the handful of Grand Central services left. There's definitely an argument that connections at Leeds are adequate, but that won't wash with the council.

The Leeds branches of the Airedale & Wharfedale lines aren't great candidates for conversion in my book- they're already high quality services that predominantly serve wealthy areas so there's not much in the way of "regeneration" potential. It's the same problem as the idea of using the Glossop/Hadfield line as Greater Manchester's "tram-train" trial- even with the increased frequency it would be seen as a downgrade in some ways, and wouldn't bring any underserved areas into the network. There's maybe an argument for the Bradford legs, but they'd have to be high-floor tram-trains to share the infrastructure with the remaining heavy rail.

I agree its highly unlikely but I bet it would have a better BCR than the real plan and a fraction of the start up costs. I suspect Glossop would have been converted to tram train a few years ago if there was a cheap solution to connecting it to Metrolink. The advantage of converting electrified lines first is that most of the work is done. It just needs appropriate tram trains with AC pantographs and high floors. Leeds big problem has been getting the network started.

 

[urbophile]

To an extent I agree that Leeds is a more difficult problem to solve, so it would make sense to prioritise the other boroughs. Leeds may be "the largest city in Europe without a Metro" but it does have decent suburban rail that is a de-facto metro.

Really? My recent knowledge of Leeds is admittedly sketchy, but what 'suburban rail' does it have that compares with London, or even Birmingham, Manchester, or Liverpool? There are only a handful of stations within the city – which itself stretches well beyond the built up area. The newly reopened stations towards Shipley have a very infrequent service if I am not mistaken. A town like Otley, officially part of Leeds, has had no rail service for over half a century. Apart from the Harrogate line there is no rail connection to the north of the city. I don't know about lines to the east or south, but I'd be surprised if many provided a metro frequency.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Really? My recent knowledge of Leeds is admittedly sketchy, but what 'suburban rail' does it have that compares with London, or even Birmingham, Manchester, or Liverpool? There are only a handful of stations within the city – which itself stretches well beyond the built up area. The newly reopened stations towards Shipley have a very infrequent service if I am not mistaken. A town like Otley, officially part of Leeds, has had no rail service for over half a century. Apart from the Harrogate line there is no rail connection to the north of the city. I don't know about lines to the east or south, but I'd be surprised if many provided a metro frequency.

I was echoing a post made by another contributor, but perhaps should have said "a de-facto metro on the corridors where it exists, from the surrounding towns/cities": there's decent and frequent services from Wakefield and Bradford, for example.
Leeds is a large city in terms of population, economic output, and regional importance- but not in land area. The Leeds City Council area is quite compact compared to neighbouring Wakefield, Bradford and Kirklees.
That's one of the reasons (though not the only reason) we're talking about a West Yorkshire mass transit scheme and not a Leeds one. The aborted trolleybus scheme was led by Leeds Council, which is why Leeds Council were behind the fiasco that is the White Rose station scheme which used funds reallocated from that project.

 

[Sir Felix Pole]

Really? My recent knowledge of Leeds is admittedly sketchy, but what 'suburban rail' does it have that compares with London, or even Birmingham, Manchester, or Liverpool? There are only a handful of stations within the city – which itself stretches well beyond the built up area. The newly reopened stations towards Shipley have a very infrequent service if I am not mistaken. A town like Otley, officially part of Leeds, has had no rail service for over half a century. Apart from the Harrogate line there is no rail connection to the north of the city. I don't know about lines to the east or south, but I'd be surprised if many provided a metro frequency.

Indeed, much of the north of Leeds has no suburban rail service, nor ever has had, but it was comprehensively served by the first generation tramway with routes, amongst others, to Roundhay, Meanwood and Lawnswood. Much of the inter-war development was planned with trams in mind, with wide dual-carriageways permitting reserved tram tracks - as in Liverpool. Similarly in the south of the city suburban services were very limited (and most were killed off at an early date by the trams). Leeds trams even reached Morley.

 

[AlastairFraser]

That sounds a good idea, linking the busy Headingley corridor, the clear destination of the Airport, huge areas of Bradford and Leeds without heavy rail

Indeed. I also like the Bradford to Wakefield light rail proposal of yours, although I wouldn't bring it to Baildon or Shipley (my Bradford to LBA tram would link Interchange and Forster Square anyway).
Bradford to LBA probably works as a phase 1 of a light rail scheme, Leeds to LBA as phase 2, and Bradford to Wakefield as phase 3.
You could invest in new/reopened stations as reciprocal investment in Calderdale and Kirklees to avoid them missing out while Leeds/Bradford/Wakefield benefit from most of the investment e.g. finally reopening Elland station and increasing service frequency on Leeds/Huddersfield to Bradford via Halifax, and a station next to Calderdale Royal Hospital + Luddenden Foot in Calderdale.

 

[Grimsby town]

In many Continental cases, it's because they never dug up their old lines

But since Leeds did, we need some kind of business case to justify the expense of building brand new lines

At the same time many continental cities have built new tram lines. France has completely rebuilt tram and metro systems in smaller urban areas than West Yorkshire, thanks largely to the lack of interference from central government.

So the local government wants the tram, the national government has said that Leeds will get a tram, but a full 2 year (maybe more) is needed to release the money to build the thing, which everybody is already saying is being built. The fact a Leeds rapid transit scheme comes back a few years after it was cancels should show politicians that this isn't going away and then should get on with developing and delivering the scheme. What is the business case supposed to achieve?

 

[anothertyke]

Indeed, much of the north of Leeds has no suburban rail service, nor ever has had, but it was comprehensively served by the first generation tramway with routes, amongst others, to Roundhay, Meanwood and Lawnswood. Much of the inter-war development was planned with trams in mind, with wide dual-carriageways permitting reserved tram tracks - as in Liverpool. Similarly in the south of the city suburban services were very limited (and most were killed off at an early date by the trams). Leeds trams even reached Morley.

But I would say the post war story of North Leeds has been driven by quite generous spread out estates, both public and private. The catchment areas of the main corridors are quite broad, typically requiring half a dozen bus routes fanning out from the spine road. That says to me that viewed as a suburb to city facility a tram is not ideal. Better would be to have a new generation of bus priorities building on the Scott Hall Rd and York Rd schemes. Now we have franchising, I am hoping that might be a possibility.