• Hi Guest . We are in the process of installing new software. If you notice a glitch please let us know.

Road, Rail & Access Issues

Which Leeds Bradford Airport link road route do you support?

  • (Option B)The second runs to the east of Rawdon and only provides direct access to the airport where

    Votes: 2 4.7%
  • (Option A) The first option includes building a more direct route from the A65, which runs along the

    Votes: 37 86.0%
  • (Option C)The final scheme would see the existing A65 and A658 around Rawdon and Yeadon upgraded wit

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • (Option D)None of the above

    Votes: 4 9.3%

  • Total voters
    43

Sherburnflyer92

Well-Known Member
May 7, 2011
820
366
63
26
37,000FT - soon!
If you want to look at how to build a successful junction; look at Thornboury roundabout. It works.

I don't think this will improve anything - but remain open to been proven wrong.

Horsforth - should be just traffic lighted getting rid of the roundabout
 

Aviador

Administrator
Staff member
Jan 12, 2009
12,083
2,880
323
HEAD OFFICE
Thread starter Admin #1,584
Spain, is on its arse financially,but gets a lot of its road building cash from the EU and they have more land than us, to do things with.
According to Google

Spain
The national public debt in Spain increased by 16,315 million euros in the first quarter of 2018 and is currently at 1,160,613 million. This figure assumes that the debt reached 98.8% of GDP in Spain, while the prior quarter, forth quarter of 2017, it was at 98.3%.

and for comparison, here's the UK stats

United Kingdom
As of Q1 (the first quarter of) 2018, UK government debt amounted to £1.78 trillion, or 86.58% of total GDP, at which time the annual cost of servicing (paying the interest) the public debt amounted to around £48 billion (which is roughly 4% of GDP or 8% of UK government tax income).

Neither are exactly glowing examples of a shining bright economy.

Spain was the quoted nation in this example but you find throughout Europe and indeed the world there's not nearly as much red-tape as there is here in the UK. If China wants a new airport they get on and build it. If Spain wants a new motorway, they get on and build it. If Bradford wants to alter a traffic light junction they need a public consultation and years of squabbling before anything is actually done.
 

Aviador

Administrator
Staff member
Jan 12, 2009
12,083
2,880
323
HEAD OFFICE
Thread starter Admin #1,586
Another good reason for the UK to leave EU, at least then we won't have to contribute towards the costs of building all them new roads been built in Spain. :sneaky:
They'll be no complaints when they take you from the new Murcia Covera Airport to your destination on the Costa Blanca.

We're the Muppets in all this, not them.

It's all a matter of opinion anyway and in another Leeds access matter, we're STILL waiting for Leeds City Council to make a decision on the airport link road. Another shining example of the UK making another hash of EVERYTHING we do!
 

TheLocalYokel

Administrator
Staff member
Jan 14, 2009
10,801
4,213
193
Wurzel Country
Admin #1,587
The planning process in this country is aimed (intentionally or not) in favour of the nimbys and fellow travellers. The government did try to reduce the bureaucratic burden a few years ago but I'm not sure there has been much of an improvement in reality. Some years ago construction of a major ring road in my area was held up for over a year because two protestors who didn't live locally came up with a number of what were obviously (and were later accepted by the court as such) spurious objections. They were reportedly given legal aid to pursue their 'cause'.

Nearly a decade ago when Bristol Airport applied to the local authority for a major expansion formal objections were lodged by environmental groups as far away as Australia. Imagine somewhere like the United Arab Emirates, another place where they just get on and build things, listening to the whinings of a group of protestors in the UK.

I don't advocate having no controls over the planning process but it has to be simplified and speeded up for the good of the country.
 

mode1

Active Member
Nov 13, 2010
365
134
43
It can be said some of these countries that get these projects built, think of certain cities with megascrapers on former deserts built by a great number of migrant workers on poor pay and poor living conditions. In part it's why they get them built. Some projects work 24 hours a day.
 

White Heather

Platinum Member
Jan 14, 2009
3,459
1,382
205
64
Leeds
My personal view is that Leeds Council have made a decision on the link road route, and I think we all know which it will be, as there is realistically only one option if we are to have the park and ride situated adjacent to the proposed airport parkway station. However, they are having to work up detailed designs now (the ones that will show exactly where the road runs, exactly which houses will disappear, and where the cuttings, bridges, and possibly even tunnels will run, so that when they finally announce their decision, they can then provide those affected most with the more accurate information).
I also strongly suspect that when they have done their engineering planning, they will want the costs estimating before publicly announcing their decision. According to the airport, they are still hoping for the parkway station to be ready for 2022 and previous discussions have shown the council recognises that the link road needs to be built to the same schedule if the park and ride is to be available when the station opens. So I think that we shouldn't mistake no announcement for the council taking no action.
 

mode1

Active Member
Nov 13, 2010
365
134
43
I get the feeling the option that people hope. A. Will be deemed to costly. That's if it ever goes ahead. Can just see it now that it may turn out more complex from a civil engineering side than the transport executive are willing to pay.
Isn't the money that was talked about for use across the whole of West Yorkshires transport and road needs? There maybe a back lash from other areas of West Yorkshire who feel too much money is being spent on one project when there will be others fighting for their own area.
There are family of mine who use and support the airport who live very close to the Layton/Brownberry area who although support the airport don't support this road scheme. Surprising to say I have a connection to a member of the local WI who I'm going to get to do a straw pole. These are people who live in the immediate route of the hotly liked route A.
It may all turn out that one of the other options are chosen to keep cost down and lessen the impact. From what family and their local neighbours have said they're very cynical about the option A and see it as eventually leading to development of greenbelt land along the route contatory to what the council have said to appease people.
 
a lot of countries that were developing in the past have learnt by our mistakes when it comes to road building and other construction and now make us look like a developing country! I guess here back in the industrial revolution they didn't expect it to be like it is now hence the reason we have no space to expand etc
 
Jun 5, 2017
18
13
13
70
Batley
The planning process may be slow and overly bureaucratic but as we live in a democracy and free country we as citizens have a right to object against the proposals of our Councils or Government, unlike some of the countries mentioned above where planning is not a problem. I know where I’d rather live!
 

TheLocalYokel

Administrator
Staff member
Jan 14, 2009
10,801
4,213
193
Wurzel Country
Admin #1,596
The planning process may be slow and overly bureaucratic but as we live in a democracy and free country we as citizens have a right to object against the proposals of our Councils or Government, unlike some of the countries mentioned above where planning is not a problem. I know where I’d rather live!
No argument with that as a general hypothesis but it's the slow pace and frequent red tape that drags matters out that I find problematical. You can have a democracy without going along at the speed of a slow bicycle race.

When two people can prevent a major ring road from going forward for a year on what were the flimsiest of reasons (as a court later determined) after all the planning processes had been exhausted there is something wrong with the system. And why should an environmental group in Australia have the right to address objections over the expansion of a regional airport in England, as was the case with Bristol Airport a few years ago, and in so doing cause extra work for local authority officials whose time is paid for by British tax payers? Those are the sorts of things that need looking at.

Let's hope that the road initiative in Leeds goes forward rapidly with due democractic processes applied to determine the best outcome.
 

White Heather

Platinum Member
Jan 14, 2009
3,459
1,382
205
64
Leeds
If Option A is not picked (for whatever reason), then the implications are:

No park and ride on the Horsforth line, impacting on all people in NW Leeds who might make use of it (and it is clearly the policy at the moment to have P&R schemes in the city). A park and ride couldn't possibly operate if the only way to access it was via Scotland Lane as it is now. There has to be a direct and decent standard road to it;

The alternative options would seriously impact on either Yeadon (thereby negating one of the main reasons to have the link road (ie: by pass Yeadon), and/or Rawdon and the A65 too (again, doing little for the airport and just making things worse over time for both Yeadon and Rawdon).

The proposed industrial and business park area behind the Avro factory (included in the airport masterplan) will be less viable as the only access to it will be via the A658 or Whitehouse Lane - neither being adequate or sensible. The entire development may there prove to be non viable without Option A and that in turn will have a negative impact on LBA's development too.

As for local objections, it is always the case that the very people who complain that the airport has a poor road network, then are likely to object when they find out that the proposed scheme to improve the situation impacts on them. The reality is that the only homes impacted by Option A that are not also impacted by Option B. are those nearest the route of the road (and the runway) on the Scotland Lane estate. However, given the lie of the land, it should be very possible for the new road to run through a cutting near here to reduce noise levels considerably. Sadly that won't do anything for pollution levels which are certain to increase. On the positive side, it will reduce traffic in Yeadon (A658) and at Rawdon too, possibly reducing the pollution in those areas.

In actual fact, Option A directly impacts very few homes along its route - only those near Horsforth Golf Club, the farm behind it and towards Bayton Lane, and then (from a potential noise/pollution perspective), those on Scotland Way. There may also be one or two properties along Scotland Lane impacted around, and beyond the junction with Whitehouse Lane. All in all, a relatively low impact for such a major scheme over several miles - and let us not forget, that this route is the same as that included in the last masterplan quite some years ago now, so it is nothing recent.

Quite frankly, Option C amounts to the 'do nothing' option as it will do nothing for the airport at all, or Yeadon, or Rawdon. If they choose to go with that one, far more people will be impacted in terms of traffic noise and pollution (along the existing roads), and disruption as the roads are widened, and as for improving access to the airport, well it will be the Parkway Station only that might do so. We may as well give up as far as roads are concerned if this time, a decent access route is not built.
 

Bigman

Well-Known Member
Jan 14, 2009
1,374
345
83
It's a shame that they cannot dig a long gradually graded tunnel from just near the Crematorium, right through to the North side of the runway, pretty much to where the new park-and-ride station would be. This would avoid any knocking down of properties, the need for a new junction with Brownberrie Lane and also result in zero surface noise pollution.
 

mode1

Active Member
Nov 13, 2010
365
134
43
Just don't expect it to be a done deal.
Whatever the loss to the airport industrial park or hub the airport are proposing, the loss of greenbelt land along the Horsforth-Rawdon boarder local residents are not in favour for. I think there is a long distance in convincing the people of the areas affected that it isn't a back door for future development along the proposed road corridor. My family members and others can't see it helping the situation further down at Horsforth roundabout however it is tinkered with.
The road proposals are going to be addressed at next week's W I meeting.
 

White Heather

Platinum Member
Jan 14, 2009
3,459
1,382
205
64
Leeds
The most likely option that would lead to more development is Option B, which from Horsforth Golf Club more or less follows Bayton Lane across to Victoria Avenue in Yeadon. I have got the impression though that the Council recognise that something must be done and that it will go ahead. Although the final choice of option will again go for consultation, it will to a large extent only confirm the route and engineering features and will confirm what people already know and what was consulted on nearly 2 years ago. Let's face it - whichever option they go for, some local people will not be happy. If they don't do something, the rest of the city and much of the airport catchment area won't be happy. There were loads of objections regarding the East Leeds Link Road, but it is going ahead anyway, and I fully expect the airport link road to do likewise.
 
Top Bottom