How do you solve a problem like Bradford?

[Grimsby town]

Much as I am a fan of battery powered vehicles this simply isn’t true. The weight of the battery will slow you down. With small gaps in electrification and small batteries that just need to plug these short gaps this won’t be that noticeable. But if you call it quits now on electrification of the network you are going to need BEMU with large, heavy batteries to cover all the extended gaps in electrification.

I agree with this position. Its crazy to think we've reached peak electrification on the network. There's plenty of lines that either have very heavy usage (e.g. Dore-Sheffield-Swinton), high speeds (e.g. Birmingham to Derby) or heavy freight use and aren't electrified. The Calder Valley is fairly low speed (mainly 70-75mph) and isn't overly frequent or used by freight which means its a fair way down the electrification priorities. It needs to be electrified to the extent that battery trains can easily use the line. The acceleration will likely be worse than an EMU, but not significantly so.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 27 Jan 2026 ==

What services passing through Bradford? Only toy trains serving small communities generating very small through flows.

Halifax is the 12th biggest flow out of Leeds.

The history of the Bradford saga is something like this:

- Initially they wanted a super-duper NPR route via Oldham and Bradford, tunnelling under either urban areas or the widest part of the Pennines. All fast Manchester - Leeds trains would use this route and Bradford would get metro frequency to both. It was completely bonkers.

Oldham was never realistically considered as part of NPR. The plan was for 8tph between Manchester and Leeds via Bradford. Hardly metro frequency. I agree though it was an overkill solution.

- They realised such a route would indeed be bonkers, and realised that investments in TRU meant it made no sense for a future NPR route to not go via Huddersfield

I'd says that's broadly accurate.

- Once Huddersfield was decided upon it became clear that Huddersfield - Bradford - Leeds would never be quicker than Huddersfield - Dewsbury - Leads (or indeed any future straight fast route).
- Bradford was never going to be on the fastest Manchester - Leeds services. We are back to only Calder Valley toy trains going to/via Interchange. The rationale for 'getting through Bradford quicker' completely evaporates.

You're missing that Bradford was still being considered as a route for some trains because there isn't capacity via Dewsbury for up to 8 trains per hour. It's also pretty clear that Bradford should be served better given the population, population growth and relatively youth of the population.

Bradford's existing city centre diameter between Forster Square and Interchange is less than 700 metres. Interchange to St James is 1km, along a hostile Wakefield Road. Bradford City Centre is not going to double in size. It just isn't. Plonking a station there isn't going to turn it into Bristol Temple Meads. It'll look like Reading West at best. Let's be clear, a bus station relocated to St James would simply be bypassed by the majority of bus routes.

But of course in order to save face, local leaders must have something, even if it means harming the actual city.

I disagree. It's clearly government policy that population should be increased around railway stations and in city centers. This is informed by research from centre for cities over the last 5 years who have shown that the UK doesn't have enough people close to the productive city centres. So a policy to increase population in city centers and public transport connectivity into city centres is being pursued. A new station at Bradford both reduces journey times to Leeds and facilitates the growth in Bradford City centre. Its completely strategically aligned with the government's goals and therefore I'd be shocked if it didn't happen.

 

[Bantamzen]

What services passing through Bradford? Only toy trains serving small communities generating very small through flows.

The history of the Bradford saga is something like this:

- Initially they wanted a super-duper NPR route via Oldham and Bradford, tunnelling under either urban areas or the widest part of the Pennines. All fast Manchester - Leeds trains would use this route and Bradford would get metro frequency to both. It was completely bonkers.
- They realised such a route would indeed be bonkers, and realised that investments in TRU meant it made no sense for a future NPR route to not go via Huddersfield
- Once Huddersfield was decided upon it became clear that Huddersfield - Bradford - Leeds would never be quicker than Huddersfield - Dewsbury - Leads (or indeed any future straight fast route).
- Bradford was never going to be on the fastest Manchester - Leeds services. We are back to only Calder Valley toy trains going to/via Interchange. The rationale for 'getting through Bradford quicker' completely evaporates.

Bradford's existing city centre diameter between Forster Square and Interchange is less than 700 metres. Interchange to St James is 1km, along a hostile Wakefield Road. Bradford City Centre is not going to double in size. It just isn't. Plonking a station there isn't going to turn it into Bristol Temple Meads. It'll look like Reading West at best. Let's be clear, a bus station relocated to St James would simply be bypassed by the majority of bus routes.

But of course in order to save face, local leaders must have something, even if it means harming the actual city.

<gives a round of applause>

Exactly all this. NPR and a shiny new Bradford station were a pipe dream that has long since been kicked into the long grass. The St James Market proposal is just the smoking remains of it.

Halifax is the 12th biggest flow out of Leeds.

And Bradford?

You're missing that Bradford was still being considered as a route for some trains because there isn't capacity via Dewsbury for up to 8 trains per hour. It's also pretty clear that Bradford should be served better given the population, population growth and relatively youth of the population.

Some trains to where though? The Calder Valley route is constrained by being a winding, 2 track, and relatively slow route across the Pennines, especially when compared to what TRU will be when completed. Trying to throw extra services down there, especially fasts is just going to lead to bunching. In fact it only takes a stopper to run a few minutes late through it and it happens now.

If you're after extra capacity, this can be achieved with longer services, especially for the semi-fasts.

I disagree. It's clearly government policy that population should be increased around railway stations and in city centers. This is informed by research from centre for cities over the last 5 years who have shown that the UK doesn't have enough people close to the productive city centres. So a policy to increase population in city centers and public transport connectivity into city centres is being pursued. A new station at Bradford both reduces journey times to Leeds and facilitates the growth in Bradford City centre. Its completely strategically aligned with the government's goals and therefore I'd be shocked if it didn't happen.

Ah government policy! I hope you've noticed that government policies change with the seasons right? So I wouldn't be clinging to that raft if I were you.

And again you are completely side stepping the issue that moving the main Bradford station away from the centre and transport hubs will increase travel times for people in Bradford, not reduce them. Trying to justify it by saying that a couple of thousand new homes will benefit doesn't cut it. And besides, you're also ignoring that the absolute priority is the area around the old Oastler Centre (AKA John Street Market). This area is already earmarked for redevelopment for city housing, and is inside what is considered the city centre. This area also has the benefit of being fairly close to both stations, as well as not requiring the mass relocation of lots of industrial businesses, as a lot of the properties are either empty or could be absorbed into the redevelopment as they are mainly retail. This is not going to be the case with St James.

 

[Halifaxlad]

Let's not forget that Bradford is still very close to Leeds anyway. Fast services to York from Leeds are about 20 miniutes, NPR to Manchester was one time about delivering a 30 miniute journey so it doesn't really matter that much about speeding up services to Leeds!

 

[Grimsby town]

And Bradford?

Interchange is the top 10

Some trains to where though? The Calder Valley route is constrained by being a winding, 2 track, and relatively slow route across the Pennines, especially when compared to what TRU will be when completed. Trying to throw extra services down there, especially fasts is just going to lead to bunching. In fact it only takes a stopper to run a few minutes late through it and it happens now.

Of course in 7 years time modern rollingstock with better acceleration will be providing all services which will reduce the speed differential between fast and stopping services on Calder Valley line. Manchester is probably going to be the main constraint on capacity for the next 10-15 years. At which point either you looking into the Huddersfield line or you upgrade the Calder Valley line if needed. Either way there's always going to be question marks around Interchanges ability to accommodate additonal rail services. Nobody in these conversations as provided evidence that its possible to accommodate additonal services using Interchange.

If you're after extra capacity, this can be achieved with longer services, especially for the semi-fasts.

I agree, lengthening is a good medium term solution which will likely occur when northern gets new rollingstock in the early 2030s. If platforms need extending, this can be done around that time. I don't believe that platform extensions and lengthening are a substitute for longer term improvements to journey times and frequency. They're a good short-term solution. Manchester has seem a lot of platform extensions on lines like Chat Moss. It's definitely a small improvement but nobody seriously believes that's Manchester's rail issues solved. The country needs to be aiming for most stations in larger urban areas to be served by 4 trains per hour.

Ah government policy! I hope you've noticed that government policies change with the seasons right? So I wouldn't be clinging to that raft if I were you.

This specific area has been consistent enough so far from Labour. I don't see why it'd change given we've got a Labour government for another 3.5 years.

And again you are completely side stepping the issue that moving the main Bradford station away from the centre and transport hubs will increase travel times for people in Bradford, not reduce them. Trying to justify it by saying that a couple of thousand new homes will benefit doesn't cut it. And besides, you're also ignoring that the absolute priority is the area around the old Oastler Centre (AKA John Street Market). This area is already earmarked for redevelopment for city housing, and is inside what is considered the city centre. This area also has the benefit of being fairly close to both stations, as well as not requiring the mass relocation of lots of industrial businesses, as a lot of the properties are either empty or could be absorbed into the redevelopment as they are mainly retail. This is not going to be the case with St James.

I've acknowledged that journeys to most areas in the city centre will be slightly longer. I believe that can be mitigated but I agree there's a disbenefit. Ideally, you'd make Interchange quicker and remove the conflicts, I don't disagree, but looking at the layout, I don't think thats possible. Journeys from most areas outside the city centre are likely to be unaffected if buses are intergrated, especially given the better road access. The station isn't about only accessing the city centre. I'd expect most trips aren't anything to do with the city centre and start or end in residential areas of Bradford.

As I say, if the business case comes out with an awful BCR, I'll agree that Interchange should stay as it is. The solution then is probably less through services.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 28 Jan 2026 ==

Let's not forget that Bradford is still very close to Leeds anyway. Fast services to York from Leeds are about 20 miniutes, NPR to Manchester was one time about delivering a 30 miniute journey so it doesn't really matter that much about speeding up services to Leeds!

Most people will only travel around 40 minutes door to door for commuting, its all about maximising the people that live within that 40 minutes. That requires a mixture of increased population density around stations and faster journeys. A through station at Bradford would definitely benefit Halifax commuters. The main benefits are simplifying the layout and allowing for additional services in the future. I don't think thats possible with the existing layout at Interchange.

 

[WAO]

<The Calder Valley route is constrained by being a winding, 2 track, and relatively slow route across the Pennines, especially when compared to what TRU will be when completed.

I was under the impression that this L&Y main line was easily graded (for the Pennines) and gently curved (except at Charlestown) and so was quite suitable in alignment for high speeds. That the system has only been maintained for 70mph with little overtaking possibility is easily reversible, in view of the budgets apparently available.

Bradford is snatching defeat out of the jaws of victory, again.

WAO

 

[Bantamzen]

Interchange is the top 10

So more punters than Halifax. Therefore it inconveniences more than it helps.

Of course in 7 years time modern rollingstock with better acceleration will be providing all services which will reduce the speed differential between fast and stopping services on Calder Valley line. Manchester is probably going to be the main constraint on capacity for the next 10-15 years. At which point either you looking into the Huddersfield line or you upgrade the Calder Valley line if needed. Either way there's always going to be question marks around Interchanges ability to accommodate additonal rail services. Nobody in these conversations as provided evidence that its possible to accommodate additonal services using Interchange.

I agree, lengthening is a good medium term solution which will likely occur when northern gets new rollingstock in the early 2030s. If platforms need extending, this can be done around that time. I don't believe that platform extensions and lengthening are a substitute for longer term improvements to journey times and frequency. They're a good short-term solution. Manchester has seem a lot of platform extensions on lines like Chat Moss. It's definitely a small improvement but nobody seriously believes that's Manchester's rail issues solved. The country needs to be aiming for most stations in larger urban areas to be served by 4 trains per hour.

But again do we need more when some services could be lengthened first? And just moving the station doesn't give you any more capacity down the Calder Valley anyway.

This specific area has been consistent enough so far from Labour. I don't see why it'd change given we've got a Labour government for another 3.5 years.

I do. Cost. Labour love the big money projects until the bill comes in. And Labour don't have a good track record in Bradford.

I've acknowledged that journeys to most areas in the city centre will be slightly longer. I believe that can be mitigated but I agree there's a disbenefit. Ideally, you'd make Interchange quicker and remove the conflicts, I don't disagree, but looking at the layout, I don't think thats possible. Journeys from most areas outside the city centre are likely to be unaffected if buses are intergrated, especially given the better road access. The station isn't about only accessing the city centre. I'd expect most trips aren't anything to do with the city centre and start or end in residential areas of Bradford.

The problem is a station at St James wouldn't be integrated, as many services within Bradford wouldn't serve it or pass close by. Remember the site on the far site of one of the busiest roads in the city, so bus companies will be loath to cross it if they really don't have to. And moving the entire bus hub away from the centre as well as the railway station just causes even more issues.

As I say, if the business case comes out with an awful BCR, I'll agree that Interchange should stay as it is. The solution then is probably less through services.

It comes out as an awful idea period. I promise you if this ever got to public consultation it would get trashed by the travelling public. If you think I'm cynical, just wait to see what Bradfordians would think!

Most people will only travel around 40 minutes door to door for commuting, its all about maximising the people that live within that 40 minutes. That requires a mixture of increased population density around stations and faster journeys. A through station at Bradford would definitely benefit Halifax commuters. The main benefits are simplifying the layout and allowing for additional services in the future. I don't think thats possible with the existing layout at Interchange.

I'm starting to get the impression you're more concerned about the overall time time of the journeys over what people actually need. "Hey we made your trips to Leeds a couple of minutes quicker!! Yeah it takes 10 minutes longer to get to the train, but still you spend more time out in the fresh air / rain / wind / hail / snow...."

I was under the impression that this L&Y main line was easily graded (for the Pennines) and gently curved (except at Charlestown) and so was quite suitable in alignment for high speeds. That the system has only been maintained for 70mph with little overtaking possibility is easily reversible, in view of the budgets apparently available.

But it's far from a direct route, has a mixture of semi-fasts, stoppers and freight so you could speed up some services, but they'd just catch up slower ones quicker. And it's quite notorious for poor weather conditions, flooding etc, being for much of it in a deep valley climbing up into the Pennine hills. It's not an easy route to get any speed improvements, save perhaps wiring it.

Bradford is snatching defeat out of the jaws of victory, again.

WAO

Bradford is losing out by not moving it's station away from the city to speed up trains for Halifax, but make journey times longer for Bradford passengers? Erm....

 

[WAO]

Bradford is losing out by not moving it's station away from the city to speed up trains for Halifax, but make journey times longer for Bradford passengers? Erm....

I meant by not maximising the use of its well laid out, Stephenson designed, Calder Valley route to Manchester. Just reinstaing some closed platforms at Halifax and Rochdale would reduce conflicts. It shares other disadvantages with the LNWR Standedge route, of course.

WAO

 

[The Pelican]

If St James gets built, it should be as an additonal station to Interchange, which everything going through Bradford should stop at, aiming to produce a kind of Manchester Oxford Road or Vauxhall for that part of Bradford. But that will depend on the regeneration producing an area which a high fraction of Bradford visitors want to visit, in the same way lots of Manchester visitors want to go to the Uni area and lots of South Western Mainline users want to go to the Victoria line or Pimlico.

 

[Tetchytyke]

I know for a fact that this station is wanted by local councillors purely simply because it's new and shiny, Labour politicians in the area are well known for getting distracted by such regardless of their actual value. Very people local politicians have sat down and actually thought this through, they just lap up whatever concepts are thrown at them.

It's a very difficult line for local politicians to tread.

Central government have said that they want to deliver NPR and they have set out the terms for having NPR come to Bradford. Those terms are that a new through station would be required and that new through station would need to be located somewhere relatively easy to build on.

It's not like Bradford Council have a menu of options to choose from. They're not selecting from a smorgasbord of new transport solutions. They quite simply have two choices in this: like it or lump it.

It comes out as an awful idea period. I promise you if this ever got to public consultation it would get trashed by the travelling public. If you think I'm cynical, just wait to see what Bradfordians would think!

And that would suit the politicians at a national level perfectly.

"We offered them a billion quid for a new train station and the idiots turned it down!"

I meant by not maximising the use of its well laid out, Stephenson designed, Calder Valley route to Manchester. Just reinstaing some closed platforms at Halifax and Rochdale would reduce conflicts.

The issue with the Calder Valley is inter-weaving the fast trains in between the stoppers.

Sowerby Bridge used to have four platforms and there is room to either re-instate the other two platforms or move platform two to the south to allow fast lines through the middle. Even that would be enough to allow the fast trains to overtake the semi-fasts which, in turn, might allow 3tph to run Manchester to Bradford. Rochdale isn't quite such an issue as the stopper between Rochdale and Manchester uses the bay.

In terms of time, it is 53 minutes from Bradford to Manchester, I think that's pretty good really. Maybe you could knock 5-10 minutes off the journey time- and very nice it would be too- but it's not as if the current service is slow.

The issue is capacity. A 2-car 195 has 120 seats, which is about the same as the 142s it replaced. Fine if they're doubled but they're often not. I'd be spending my money on additional carriages before worrying about a billion quid railway station.

 

[D6130]

I meant by not maximising the use of its well laid out, Stephenson designed, Calder Valley route to Manchester. Just reinstaing some closed platforms at Halifax and Rochdale would reduce conflicts. It shares other disadvantages with the LNWR Standedge route, of course.

WAO

Reinstating the former four tracks between Mytholmroyd and Hebden Bridge would be useful too.... especially if the former goods loops were to become passenger loops, so that slower passenger services - as well as freights - could be overtaken. Likewise - but less likely to happen - the former Up Goods between Dover Bridge and Eastwood could be reinstated as a reversible loop by the addition of a couple of crossovers.

 

[MichaelTrains]

I meant by not maximising the use of its well laid out, Stephenson designed, Calder Valley route to Manchester. Just reinstaing some closed platforms at Halifax and Rochdale would reduce conflicts. It shares other disadvantages with the LNWR Standedge route, of course.

WAO

Tend to agree with you that if this new station in Bradford is mothballed then there should be extra platforms at Halifax, Rochdale and of course the interchange.

The lack of a bay at Halifax has on more than one occasion seem the Hull - Halifax service be curtailed and dumped at the Interchange already adding to the congestion.

 

[YorksLad12]

The issue with the Calder Valley is inter-weaving the fast trains in between the stoppers.

Sowerby Bridge used to have four platforms and there is room to either re-instate the other two platforms or move platform two to the south to allow fast lines through the middle. Even that would be enough to allow the fast trains to overtake the semi-fasts which, in turn, might allow 3tph to run Manchester to Bradford. Rochdale isn't quite such an issue as the stopper between Rochdale and Manchester uses the bay.

In terms of time, it is 53 minutes from Bradford to Manchester, I think that's pretty good really. Maybe you could knock 5-10 minutes off the journey time- and very nice it would be too- but it's not as if the current service is slow.

The issue is capacity. A 2-car 195 has 120 seats, which is about the same as the 142s it replaced. Fine if they're doubled but they're often not. I'd be spending my money on additional carriages before worrying about a billion quid railway station.

Reinstating the former four tracks between Mytholmroyd and Hebden Bridge would be useful too.... especially if the former goods loops were to become passenger loops, so that slower passenger services - as well as freights - could be overtaken. Likewise - but less likely to happen - the former Up Goods between Dover Bridge and Eastwood could be reinstated as a reversible loop by the addition of a couple of crossovers.

Both good points, but no-one's doing that work... which is a problem. An underground HS2-esque line from Manchester to Leeds via Bradford isn't the solution if you just want faster journey times from Manchester to Bradford; you need/want the express-style services that the other route has, that only call at Huddersfield between Manchester and Leeds. If only the pesky stoppers could be moved out of the way for a while...

The lack of a bay at Halifax has on more than one occasion seem the Hull - Halifax service be curtailed and dumped at the Interchange already adding to the congestion.

Halifax needs a more comprehensive plan than just an additional bay. Did the Eureka nursery reopen after the pandemic, or is that whole platform free for redevelopment? If so, reopen that as a 150m platform, use P2 for terminators and you'll also separate out passengers (that island is a bit narrow by modern standards). With suitable four-tracking either side of the hill you could speed Manchester-Bradford express services up by letting them overtake the stoppers. But that's probably not 'big' enough for some...

 

[NCT]

You're missing that Bradford was still being considered as a route for some trains because there isn't capacity via Dewsbury for up to 8 trains per hour. It's also pretty clear that Bradford should be served better given the population, population growth and relatively youth of the population.

You lengthen trains first. 4 short trains per hour to 6 long trains an hour is a lot of capacity upgrade. If the Manchester - Leeds flows commands 8tph, 2tph via Bradford to be overtaken won't get used by through passengers, so those 6tph will continue being busy. Those via Bradford trains will carry virtually no through passengers that making Bradford a through station would be of virtually no value.

Once through demand does get to that level, that means there's a case for a Huddersfield - Leeds new express line. Costs saved from not building through Warrington, under Piccadilly and through Bradford would buy you this new line. You build a connection from the Brighouse direction to run fast Halifax trains and divert Copy Pit trains onto this new line. Then you eliminate through flows at Bradford Interchange altogether. Then with a bit of modest upgrade you split Bradford Interchange into 2 operationally independent sides:

West side
- 2tph Bradford - Manchester via Calder Valley
- 2tph Bradford - Halifax - Brighouse fast to Leeds
- 2tph Bradford - Huddersfield (if Pickle Bridge gets a business case) - Manchester
- 2tph Bradford - Huddersfield shuttle

East side
- high frequency self-contained metro to Leeds (platform 0-6)

I disagree. It's clearly government policy that population should be increased around railway stations and in city centers. This is informed by research from centre for cities over the last 5 years who have shown that the UK doesn't have enough people close to the productive city centres. So a policy to increase population in city centers and public transport connectivity into city centres is being pursued. A new station at Bradford both reduces journey times to Leeds and facilitates the growth in Bradford City centre. Its completely strategically aligned with the government's goals and therefore I'd be shocked if it didn't happen.

Bradford city centre is simply not big enough to withstand its main station moving a whole km away. The city centre will die.

You don't need to move the station to encourage house building. Plenty of dreck around the existing Interchange. Moving the station 1km out reduces bus access to rail and reduces the number of people within commutable radius to Leeds.

With Interchange - Leeds converted to an electrified metro, you can add stops at Laisterdyke, Tyersal, Stanningley and Armley - existing dense communities with poor rail access. That's how you increase the rail commutable population.

 

[357]

The lack of a bay at Halifax has on more than one occasion seem the Hull - Halifax service be curtailed and dumped at the Interchange already adding to the congestion.

Last I heard the nursery was stopping them bringing one of the platforms into use. There was confusion about if they own or rent - but operationally a middle platform connected to both lines at each end would be ideal.

 

[MichaelTrains]

Last I heard the nursery was stopping them bringing one of the platforms into use. There was confusion about if they own or rent - but operationally a middle platform connected to both lines at each end would be ideal.

What's stopping them from reinstating the platform? Surely there is room further up from the signal box down to where the nursery is to reopen what I presume would be a platform 0?

 

[YorksLad12]

What's stopping them from reinstating the platform? Surely there is room further up from the signal box down to where the nursery is to reopen what I presume would be a platform 0?

That’s where I thought a new bay could/would be squeezed in, but it would depend on the length as well. Would have to be a minimum of 100m, with a minimum of around 3m of platform width. At least it wouldn’t need a lift!

 

[357]

What's stopping them from reinstating the platform? Surely there is room further up from the signal box down to where the nursery is to reopen what I presume would be a platform 0?

That was going to give a platform length of around 80 usable meters and the desire at the time was to have all platforms able to fit a 5 car train.

I don't know if the nursery own or lease - but from the discussion a couple of years ago the idea was to make Halifax a similar track layout to Laindon or Leigh-On-Sea.

 

[Grimsby town]

So more punters than Halifax. Therefore it inconveniences more than it helps.

No because all Halifax travellers receive the benefits. Only Bradford travellers walking to the city centre will be disadvantaged. The business case will provide more information on which passenger number is greater.

But again do we need more when some services could be lengthened first? And just moving the station doesn't give you any more capacity down the Calder Valley anyway.

They likely will be lengthened first. I hate the argument we can't start planning to invest until all services are 6 coaches long. That's not sane planning. Sure lengthen trains in the short term but plan for more trains in the future.

I do. Cost. Labour love the big money projects until the bill comes in. And Labour don't have a good track record in Bradford.

The funding is already there. As HS2 funding is round down, funding and resources will switch to NPR.

The problem is a station at St James wouldn't be integrated, as many services within Bradford wouldn't serve it or pass close by. Remember the site on the far site of one of the busiest roads in the city, so bus companies will be loath to cross it if they really don't have to. And moving the entire bus hub away from the centre as well as the railway station just causes even more issues.

The bus companies will be franchised at this point. They'll be told where to stop. Bus gates, priority traffic signals and segregated crossing can all be used to improve journey times and reliability. Again that's all a matter of design. If the specifics of the design aren't well done then there could be issues, but we simply don't know that yet.

It comes out as an awful idea period. I promise you if this ever got to public consultation it would get trashed by the travelling public. If you think I'm cynical, just wait to see what Bradfordians would think!

We'll have to wait and see. You're clearly heavily biased against.

I'm starting to get the impression you're more concerned about the overall time time of the journeys over what people actually need. "Hey we made your trips to Leeds a couple of minutes quicker!! Yeah it takes 10 minutes longer to get to the train, but still you spend more time out in the fresh air / rain / wind / hail / snow...."

Journey time, frequency and reliability are all some of the most important determinants for travel, particularly for commuting and business travel. I don't think weather is a huge issue, if it was nothing would happen in Britain.

But it's far from a direct route, has a mixture of semi-fasts, stoppers and freight so you could speed up some services, but they'd just catch up slower ones quicker. And it's quite notorious for poor weather conditions, flooding etc, being for much of it in a deep valley climbing up into the Pennine hills. It's not an easy route to get any speed improvements, save perhaps wiring it.

So build the route to Huddersfield. I want to see better services, I don't care too much how its delivered. If somebody puts a proposal in front of me that improves interchange significantly and allows more and quicker services, I'll happily support it.

 

[NCT]

I'll happily support it.

Will Treasury?

 

[Grimsby town]

You lengthen trains first. 4 short trains per hour to 6 long trains an hour is a lot of capacity upgrade. If the Manchester - Leeds flows commands 8tph, 2tph via Bradford to be overtaken won't get used by through passengers, so those 6tph will continue being busy. Those via Bradford trains will carry virtually no through passengers that making Bradford a through station would be of virtually no value.

TPE already has a tender out for 195m trains which are as long as the infrastructure will realistically accommodate. So they are being lengthened first.

The Bradford services can be cheaper to encourage use. People choose to use northern via Bradford to get to Leeds over TPE due to price. I've done it once or twice myself before.

Once through demand does get to that level, that means there's a case for a Huddersfield - Leeds new express line. Costs saved from not building through Warrington, under Piccadilly and through Bradford would buy you this new line. You build a connection from the Brighouse direction to run fast Halifax trains and divert Copy Pit trains onto this new line. Then you eliminate through flows at Bradford Interchange altogether. Then with a bit of modest upgrade you split Bradford Interchange into 2 operationally independent sides:

West side
- 2tph Bradford - Manchester via Calder Valley
- 2tph Bradford - Halifax - Brighouse fast to Leeds
- 2tph Bradford - Huddersfield (if Pickle Bridge gets a business case) - Manchester
- 2tph Bradford - Huddersfield shuttle

East side
- high frequency self-contained metro to Leeds (platform 0-6)

I don't mind the ideas but I'm pretty sceptical that will be paid for by not building new stations at those locations. Only Piccadilly is likely to be fully underground station. Its probably going to need more spending at Leeds to accommodate additonal services and need more services from the Calder Valley into Leeds than you've stated there.

Bradford city centre is simply not big enough to withstand its main station moving a whole km away. The city centre will die.

It won't. I've repeated numerous examples with similar stations that don't have dead centres. Stockport is very similar and is thriving. Nobody has actually acknowledged that point yet.

You don't need to move the station to encourage house building. Plenty of dreck around the existing Interchange. Moving the station 1km out reduces bus access to rail and reduces the number of people within commutable radius to Leeds.

Not sure how it does that when not many live Bradford City Centre currently. Bus access can be maintained with a new interchange. Again its all in the design.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 28 Jan 2026 ==

Will Treasury?

If its got a better business case then I'm sure the Treasury will be all over it.

 

[NCT]

TPE already has a tender out for 195m trains which are as long as the infrastructure will realistically accommodate. So they are being lengthened first.

The Bradford services can be cheaper to encourage use. People choose to use northern via Bradford to get to Leeds over TPE due to price. I've done it once or twice myself before.

Those cheap fares trips won't generate good business cases.

It won't. I've repeated numerous examples with similar stations that don't have dead centres. Stockport is very similar and is thriving. Nobody has actually acknowledged that point yet.

Stockport station isn't 1 km away from the centre.

Not sure how it does that when not many live Bradford City Centre currently. Bus access can be maintained with a new interchange. Again its all in the design.

Bradford as a inbound destination needs its stations on the doorstep, not 1 whole km away.

You want all buses that currently serve interchange to be diverted via or extended to St James. That'll require a lot of subsidy - money Bradford council won't have, and cause gridlock. Public control doesn't mean licence to print money.

Manchester Road buses won't be able to serve St James - the road network simply doesn't allow it.

If its got a better business case then I'm sure the Treasury will be all over it.

I admire the optimism ...

 

[Andyh82]

There are plans in place to convert the ‘pickle bridge’ route into a cycle lane, as part of WYCA’s A641 corridor improvements. At the moment you can walk along part of the route, but not all of it. This would reinstate all of it (besides the missing viaduct and the bit with houses)

Although the plans have been through various iterations over a number of years so like many things might not actually happen.

It’d be perverse to spend all this money on the route, if it had to then be closed to convert back to a railway.

 

[Grimsby town]

Those cheap fares trips won't generate good business cases.

Fares have very little to do with infrastructure business cases.

Stockport station isn't 1 km away from the centre.

St James Market isn't 1km away from most of Bradford City Centre.

Straight-line distances from the centre of St James Market:

• Entrance of Interchange - 477m
• Centre of the Broadway - 746m
• Entrance of Forster Square - 1080m
• Furthest point of the city centre (subjective) but within 1400m

Straight-line distances from Stockport station entrance.

• Centre of the bus station - 307 metres
• Centre of the Merseyway - 607 metres
• Centre of The Light - 682 metres
• Furthest point of the town centre - 900 metres

So Stockport is slightly closer to some amenities but its also a smaller city than Bradford. The north end of Bradford City Centre also has far better access to Forster Square so I would argue is less of an issue. Stockport is clearly comparable and clearly shows that the distances and height difference is clearly acceptable.

Bradford as a inbound destination needs its stations on the doorstep, not 1 whole km away.

You want all buses that currently serve interchange to be diverted via or extended to St James. That'll require a lot of subsidy - money Bradford council won't have, and cause gridlock. Public control doesn't mean licence to print money.

Bradford council won't be subsidising it directly. It'll be up controlled by the combined authority. A minute or two of journey time is not going to require significant subsidy.

Manchester Road buses won't be able to serve St James - the road network simply doesn't allow it.

I think its pretty likely the road network will be changed to support the new development. Again let's see the details of the proposals before arguing about that. Its difficult to say that's an issue until there's detailed proposals.

 

[Bantamzen]

No because all Halifax travellers receive the benefits. Only Bradford travellers walking to the city centre will be disadvantaged. The business case will provide more information on which passenger number is greater.

You've already answered this upthread, Bradford has more passengers and all will be made to travel further to get their trains.

If this is a business case from Bradford Council, then I'll be telling everyone in Bradford to object to it and vote the council out.

They likely will be lengthened first. I hate the argument we can't start planning to invest until all services are 6 coaches long. That's not sane planning. Sure lengthen trains in the short term but plan for more trains in the future.

But your not planning anything but moving the station, with the claim that will increase capacity. But the lines either side are still exactly the same, with exactly the same capacity constraints. So what you're proposing is spending 9, or even 10 figure sums to increase travel times between Leeds and Halifax. Is that a sane use of such amounts of money. Answers on a postcard to HM Treasury....

The funding is already there. As HS2 funding is round down, funding and resources will switch to NPR.

I'll say it again. If HS2 can't be funded to the North of England, NPR as was, i.e. a high speed new alignment is a pipe dream. The pledged amount, £43bn if I recall correctly is not for any single route but an overall budget.

But here's the catch. Until contracts are signed, boots are on the grounds and holes being dug, nothing is nailed on. And I refer you back to HS2 b/c. They were all but funded, and even proposed routes on the table. I know because HS2b was going to be passing within a few miles from where I now live, and bot did it cause a stink! And yet even at that advanced stage, the project still got canned. Methinks you put too much faith into the government. I've worked in the public sector for almost 39 years, under various guises, and I promise you that you don't believe them until the job is done!

The bus companies will be franchised at this point. They'll be told where to stop. Bus gates, priority traffic signals and segregated crossing can all be used to improve journey times and reliability. Again that's all a matter of design. If the specifics of the design aren't well done then there could be issues, but we simply don't know that yet.

That's true, I'd forgotten about that. However the logisitcs will still be a nightmare, the Shipley Airedale Road is one of the busiest in the region. Stick bus gates in there for a hub and you'll cause massive traffic issues, which in turn will disrupt buses themselves.

We'll have to wait and see. You're clearly heavily biased against.

No there's no waiting and seeing. Moving the station away from where it serves a useful purpose to somewhere you hope it might doesn't make sense. If you really want it moved, develop the area up first, make it more attractive to rail users and not just consultants and designers. Then maybe we'll see.

Journey time, frequency and reliability are all some of the most important determinants for travel, particularly for commuting and business travel. I don't think weather is a huge issue, if it was nothing would happen in Britain.

You don't think the weather is an issue when asking people to walk longer distances for their trains. In Bradford?

So build the route to Huddersfield. I want to see better services, I don't care too much how its delivered. If somebody puts a proposal in front of me that improves interchange significantly and allows more and quicker services, I'll happily support it.

So you want to build a line to Huddersfield just to get the station moved? Hmmm, tail wagging dog here.

Fares have very little to do with infrastructure business cases.

St James Market isn't 1km away from most of Bradford City Centre.

Straight-line distances from the centre of St James Market:

• Entrance of Interchange - 477m
• Centre of the Broadway - 746m
• Entrance of Forster Square - 1080m
• Furthest point of the city centre (subjective) but within 1400m

Straight-line distances from Stockport station entrance.

• Centre of the bus station - 307 metres
• Centre of the Merseyway - 607 metres
• Centre of The Light - 682 metres
• Furthest point of the town centre - 900 metres

So Stockport is slightly closer to some amenities but its also a smaller city than Bradford. The north end of Bradford City Centre also has far better access to Forster Square so I would argue is less of an issue. Stockport is clearly comparable and clearly shows that the distances and height difference is clearly acceptable.

At this point I'm starting to see there's no getting through to you. You're laser focused on the new station regardless. Bradford isn't Stockport, it's passengers aren't crows, you're comparing apples and pears. Oh and Forster Square has no services down the Calder Valley, so people will still have to walk further. Unless of course people in Bradford will travel only to places served by their closest station, something I'm sure won't happen.

Bradford council won't be subsidising it directly. It'll be up controlled by the combined authority. A minute or two of journey time is not going to require significant subsidy.

Oh dear, them. Then it definitely won't happen!

I think its pretty likely the road network will be changed to support the new development. Again let's see the details of the proposals before arguing about that. Its difficult to say that's an issue until there's detailed proposals.

I'd love to see a proposal to move the Shipley Airedale somewhere else. Any ideas?

 

[Noddy]

St James Market isn't 1km away from most of Bradford City Centre.

Straight-line distances from the centre of St James Market:

• Entrance of Interchange - 477m
• Centre of the Broadway - 746m
• Entrance of Forster Square - 1080m
• Furthest point of the city centre (subjective) but within 1400m

Straight-line distances from Stockport station entrance.

• Centre of the bus station - 307 metres
• Centre of the Merseyway - 607 metres
• Centre of The Light - 682 metres
• Furthest point of the town centre - 900 metres

So Stockport is slightly closer to some amenities but its also a smaller city than Bradford. The north end of Bradford City Centre also has far better access to Forster Square so I would argue is less of an issue. Stockport is clearly comparable and clearly shows that the distances and height difference is clearly acceptable.

Stockport station has been there for 180 years and the town (it’s roads, footpaths, public transport routes etc) has grown with and around the railway station. The proposed site in Bradford has never been the site of a passenger station, even when passenger trains used to frequent the avoiding line. It’s up a hill and is completely disconnected from the city centre by the six to eight lane A650 which means it feels like a different (and much less secure) world. If the planners don’t want the new station to be wholly disconnected they’ll also have to close or re-route the A650 and some of the roads that feed it, to unite the two areas. And somehow make the topography as easy as possible, otherwise folk just won’t visit (or locate to) the city centre. Which is what Bradford actually needs.

 

[xotGD]

If this is a business case from Bradford Council, then I'll be telling everyone in Bradford to object to it and vote the council out.

All out elections in May. Very unlikely that Labour will be running Bradford after that. A new administration may have totally different ideas when it comes to rail provision for the city.

 

[Bantamzen]

All out elections in May. Very unlikely that Labour will be running Bradford after that. A new administration may have totally different ideas when it comes to rail provision for the city.

The T&A recently ran an article about "7 game changers" that could boost Bradford, and they claim that the new station would "support" up to 27,000 new jobs. They don't however explain how, or where:

Seven 'gamechangers' that could help Bradford become one of UK’s Core Cities

Seven “game-changing” developments could help Bradford become one of the UK’s Core Cities.

www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk

• The proposed new Bradford city centre rail station, which the report says will support up to 27,000 jobs.

The thing is Bradford needs to be realistic. Yes it does need redevelopment, but it's never going to be on the scale of Manchester or Leeds, but 27K jobs? I just cannot see that happening just because of a new station. And without even a hint of how that might happen, you simply have to dismiss this as rubbish, especially if you understand the economic situation in the area.

First and foremost the city centre needs work, particularly around the Kirkgate and old Oastler Centre where there is a lot of empty properties. Throw in tarting up of both stations, and sort out the bus station and that will go a long way to triggering improvements. And even though it would be gut wrenching, perhaps a new shared stadium for City & the Bulls. I know quite some time ago there was serious talk from a potential investor of combining both clubs, & building a new ground. The area around Canal Road was mooted as a possible spot, which would mean it would have seen thousands more home supporters coming into the centre every other weekend either from the city itself, or away fans arriving by train. Plus it could have been used for other events such as gigs, and it would still be cheaper than the Gateway station, adding way more value than shunting the station away from the centre to speed up trains for people going to Halifax.

What it doesn't need is some pie in the sky, "If we build it they will come" project that will end up costing vast sums of money. Because almost certainly such projects will get dramatically scaled back, or simply canned completely. I get the impression that @Grimsby town's passion for the new station is out of professional pride, rather than a pragmatic outlook. But Bradford has had grandiose projects waved in front of it before. Lots of presentations, drawings, renders and promises of great regeneration, only for the reality to kick in when the costs become apparent. I lived, schooled and worked in the city for most of my life, and we've seen all this before.

 

[Grimsby town]

Stockport station has been there for 180 years and the town (it’s roads, footpaths, public transport routes etc) has grown with and around the railway station. The proposed site in Bradford has never been the site of a passenger station, even when passenger trains used to frequent the avoiding line. It’s up a hill and is completely disconnected from the city centre by the six to eight lane A650 which means it feels like a different (and much less secure) world. If the planners don’t want the new station to be wholly disconnected they’ll also have to close or re-route the A650 and some of the roads that feed it, to unite the two areas. And somehow make the topography as easy as possible, otherwise folk just won’t visit (or locate to) the city centre. Which is what Bradford actually needs.

I completely agree that at the moment the infrastructure is not there but it will obviously be included as part of the station. It may even get private funding from the proposed development. I don't think it requires the closure the A650. The height differences makes a bridge or pedestrian tunnel more likely than on a completely flat alignment.

Similar issues exist elsewhere in places such as Derby where there's literally a 6 lane road called Traffic Street to cross to reach the town centre from the station.

 

[Halifaxlad]

That was going to give a platform length of around 80 usable meters and the desire at the time was to have all platforms able to fit a 5 car train.

I don't know if the nursery own or lease - but from the discussion a couple of years ago the idea was to make Halifax a similar track layout to Laindon or Leigh-On-Sea.

The 3rd platform at Halifax is leased to Eureka, mainly just the bit under the canopy. It ceased functioning as a Nursery just after covid and the now it is barely used. Network Rail own the platform!

 

[tbtc]

They more I think about it, I'm coming round to the opinion that we don't solve Bradford. Not in infrastructure terms anyhow. Just stick an extra carriage on Calder Valley trains and leave thev city untouched

The longer these threads go on, the further out this "Gateway" station appears to be getting (I'm sure it was 300m further, then 350m, now I'm seeing multiple people claim it's 1km... By Tuesday it'll be seeing posts complain that the location is five miles away... )

Interchange already has sufficient platforms to cope with one platform for the Calder Valley, one for Leeds, one for the terminating Huddersfield and Kings Cross services to layover - which is big enough for them to share on the rare times they are both there at the same time - plus one spare.

It's just cost thirty five million of public money to put one more platform in at Foster Square, so if that's the going rate then it seems completely uneconomical to build an extra platform at Interchange when there's already one spare

Instead, focus the budget on places like Halifax where the money could buy a lot more

(And maybe some on the healthcare budget - despite the young average age of the locals, their fitness must be poor since I kept reading that it would take an extra ten minutes for average passengers to walk the additional 350m to a proposed Gateway station)

In a couple of years, once GBR are running everything, and TPE gets yet another new fleet of trains, there won't be the Leeds-Manchester passengers using up seats on Calder Valley services, since there'll be more capacity on the Huddersfield route and GBR won't have the incentive to offer cheap fares on the Todmorden route that Northern currently do - that should free up a bit of capacity through Bradford

That would allow the existing services to simplify their stopping patterns (e.g. a station like Bramley/ Low Moor seems pointless with half hourly gaps, it needs everything stopping there to be competitive), turn the line into a local train for local passengers

If the plan to wire from Leeds to Interchange does go ahead then the bimode trains would hopefully be able to accelerate away better, saving some of the tedium as a Sprinter tries to get up the hill from a standing start

In other words, whilst there are clearly problems, it seems to expensive to "fix" Bradford, the benefits don't seem to warrant the costs