Connectivity is not the only precursor to growth, though it is important. Traffic and lack of transport options also hampers growth. For evidence of this, just go down to the new retail park in Kirkstall during rush hour and have a look at how many shoppers are knocking around during at that time. The traffic puts people off visiting, despite the fact that thousands of people crawl past it every day. If park and ride decreases traffic on the roads, it is hugely beneficial to the economy. Lost hours cost a lot of money.
You mention growth is not possible without further spend. Whilst there is an element of truth in the 'speculate to accumulate' argument, to put it into a LBA context, the departure hall is almost empty after 5pm every day and, outside the departure and arrival times of the based aircraft, it is probably significantly underutilised. One way to encourage growth without spending a penny on infrastructure is to attract non based airlines to use the airport, thereby utilising the periods of considerable down time. There is always a way of looking at everything and making it work better without spending money which, in turn, leads to growth.
Whilst you are right that a link would increase passenger numbers and encourage growth, doing so at the expense of the other needed improvements would be a very politically unpopular move as well as being very damaging to local communities. If there is one thing that I know from living in Leeds and spending an inordinate amount of time in my car for work, the road infrastructure - particularly around North West Leeds - is in serious need of upgrade. The money that has been mooted is for the City of Leeds and must be spent accordingly, providing benefits to all corners of the city. This is precisely why schemes have been announced in North West Leeds, North East Leeds, South East Leeds, South Leeds and West Leeds. Everyone ought to benefit to some extent. This will create and sustain jobs across the city, including building, provision of new services, new business space, housing and social benefits and the reduction of traffic. If the money were simply spent on a link to LBA, the wider benefits would not be felt for a very long time, if at all and, in the short term at least, could actually do exactly the opposite. Quite aside from anything else, handing over £121m for the purpose of giving the airport something that its owners have entirely no inclination of contributing towards would be laughable, like giving benefits to people who are simply too lazy to work.
Then there are the more practical issues. I have spent a bit of time thinking about this as I do not want to get into trouble with the statistics brigade. The point at which the line would branch off from the Harrogate line is at 133m above sea level. The point it would need to reach at the airport based on the location set out in the masterplan is 196m above sea level. The distance is 3000m, give or take a few. This means that the constant incline required would be 1 in 47. However, this would only be the case if every metre of the line climbed at the same rate. As this would not be the case, sections of the line would hit 1 in 40 or steeper. Currently, the steepest gradient on the British Railway network is the Lickey Incline, at 1 in 37. Whilst in reality the class 150 DMUs that usually traverse the route - and the Class 170s that are mooted to do so in future - can climb this sort of gradient, a banking locomotive would still have to be put on stand by just in case they got stuck. Winter weather plus that gradient is not a good mix. Then there are the capacity constraints in Leeds. With the planned increases on the Harrogate line to 4 trains per hour, further services to LBA would make it 6 per hour. These would have to fit in with the 6 trains per hour along the Airedale and Wharfedale lines at the point between Leeds Station and Canal Road. 12 trains per hour in each direction over a flat crossing into only 4 platforms at Leeds station where the minimum turnaround time is set at 10 minutes would not fit. Then someone would have to pay for the trains which would likely run at a loss. All of these things would have to be dealt with before it could be opened. It just isn't as simple as 'build the line.'
When you put absolutely everything into context and take the city region into consideration, an LBA park and ride really is the best option and, judging by the LBA facebook page, they seem to think so too. Remember, just two years ago, a report was published into the future of transport in Leeds. At that time, LBA parkway was dismissed as an option based on cost. Two years further down the line, conditions are right for it to be built. There is a public will, a political will and available funds. Who's to say that, in another few years, LBA won't have done an excellent job in attracting passengers, started expanding the terminal and suddenly building a rail link is a good option?
