New stations for Leeds

[Grumpy]

Simple and quick to drive into Leeds (from Harrogate)? Maybe you know some good shortcuts and free places to park in the city? Fair enough.

But, to echo what I've said to lejog above, if this is Leeds money to spend in Leeds then a station in suburban Harrogate isn't going to be on the agenda.

A "Cookridge" station also has the benefit of Airport links, which Pannal wouldn't provide. Plus you may have space to provide parking to attract people from Otley etc (which current constraints at Horsforth don't permit).



.

Plenty of people drive from Harrogate into Leeds and find parking now. The road into Leeds (Scott Hall Road) is probably one of the relatively least congested.

If this is Leeds money to be spent on benefitting Leeds then getting current Harrogate car commuters to leave their cars at Pannal and reduce car use in Leeds would be a good use. Although I accept political reality.

With regard to the alleged Cookridge airport links this all sounds very similar to the benefits that were claimed when the Parkway station was being proposed near to East Midlands airport. The reality is that the bus from Parkway to Airport has basically withered to an infrequent 6 seater minibus running for a few hours/day. Meanwhile the direct bus services from the centres of Nottingham/Derby and Leicester continue to thrive.

 

[Spod]

A statement has been made defending the choice of a parkway station on the Leeds - Harrogate line as a way to serve the airport, and explaining a bit about what happens next.

Open letter about proposed parkway station serving Leeds Bradford Airport

In the last few days there has been some debate about the proposed Leeds Bradford Airport parkway station, part of the plans for £270million of transport investment in Leeds. We would like to explain why this is the best and most viable solution to meet a variety of needs and deliver benefits for Leeds and beyond.

Improving access for passengers to the airport is a priority, and will increase the airport’s contribution to the regional economy. A 2014 government feasibility study into a new rail station at the airport concluded it would cost up to £100m and identified significant engineering challenges. Tram-train has also been considered but would involve significant additional costs, a protracted approval process with no guarantee of success, and challenges to connect into the city’s transport network. Both of these options would take at least ten years to deliver. That’s too long to wait.

Our preferred option of a parkway station scores higher on three points: 1. it can be delivered at a much lower cost, estimated at £23m, making best use of the government money; 2. it can be delivered by the early 2020s – the people of Leeds told us they wanted improvements as quickly as possible; and 3. a parkway located on the existing Leeds-Harrogate line would double as a park-and-ride, reducing congestion.

With over 800,000 passengers forecast a year, the parkway has a much stronger business case than a station designed just for the airport, with an estimate of up to 400,000 passengers a year.

We are waiting for a decision from the Department for Transport on the proposals we announced before Christmas. If the proposals are approved we will consult widely on each of the schemes. Following consultation we will finalise the location of the Leeds Bradford Parkway and the link road, in the same way that other major transport infrastructure schemes are developed in the UK. At the same time we will continue to push for significant investment for an integrated mass transit scheme for Leeds and the city region.

Cllr Judith Blake: Leader of Leeds City Council

Cllr Richard Lewis: Leeds City Council executive member for regeneration, transport and planning

Nigel Foster: Chair of Leeds Transport Expert Advisory Panel

 

[lejog]

This was first published in the Yorkshire Post last week in response to the following opinion piece.

Tom Richmond

HERE we go again. Having wasted a small fortune on a trolleybus system that was flawed from the moment it was imposed upon Leeds by Alistair Darling, the then Transport Secretary, history appears to be repeating itself. I refer to the controversial plan to build a parkway station, with park and ride facilities, about a mile from Leeds Bradford Airport, already the most inappropriately located international gateway in the UK, and the latest correspondence between local MP Greg Mulholland and Leeds City Council. Like all diligent MPs, Mr Mulholland was doing his job when he wrote to council chief executive Tom Riordan on January 25 to ask a series of detailed – and relevant – questions that are pertinent to his Leeds North West constituents, the wider city and the Leeds to Harrogate railway which already can’t cope with passenger numbers at the best of times.

They included the following:

• What land and properties/buildings would need to be compulsorily purchased for the plans to go ahead? Please provide a list.
  
• How much will the compulsory purchase cost (including legal and professional fees, officer time and all associated costs) including any envisaged compensation payments?
  
• What/how many buildings would need to be demolished for the plans to go ahead? Please list them.
  
• What is the size of the proposed site of the station and park and ride? Please provide the area and the footprint.
  
• What would be the cost of the road changes, new road sections, road improvements necessary to both serve the buses to transport passengers and traffic using the park and ride site?

However the reply from Martin Farrington, the council’s director of city development and the officer who admitted at the trolleybus public inquiry that he had little experience of transport planning, could not have been more unconvincing.

I’ll leave you to be the judge. “At this stage in the process and prior to the detailed engineering development and prior to public engagement we are not in position to confirm the specifics of land ownership or the need or otherwise for the exercise of compulsory purchase powers,” he wrote. “Suffice to say in developing the scheme proposals there will be full cognisance to the impacts on residents and business and will seek to reduce these as far as practicable including any need to take possession/demolish buildings.“The costs for any necessary land acquisition will be assembled alongside the detailed development of the scheme options and their associated valuations.”

In other words, the council has not even done the basics – as this doublespeak makes clear. Forgive my naïvety, but shouldn’t these matters have been considered before Leeds Council revealed a plan which could do little to reduce congestion in the airport’s vicinity? I note there was also no cost-benefit analysis as to whether sufficient passengers will use the service – and then catch a shuttle bus to and from the airport. This couldn’t be more basic. Sorry, but Mr Riordan needs to answer the MP’s questions rather than deferring to an officer who – no pun intended – does not have the best track record. They’re in the public interest and it’s what local taxpayers have a right to expect of him. It’s called prudent civic leadership.

I understand that local residents are concerned about the possible compulsory purchase of land and homes for the new station and link roads, when (as the debate earlier in this thread showed) there no published details of the proposed site - and the council's second reply still leaves the questions unanswered.

 

[Grumpy]

So the Council Officer admits they have no idea of the land requirement or size of the station, with no detailed engineering design. However they are saying it will cost £23m and they seem determined to proceed. Straight from the GWML electrification how to make a balls up handbook.

 

[quantinghome]

So the Council Officer admits they have no idea of the land requirement or size of the station, with no detailed engineering design. However they are saying it will cost £23m and they seem determined to proceed. Straight from the GWML electrification how to make a balls up handbook.

Given the scheme has only just been proposed, it's not much of a surprise that details are scarce. Fully engineered station designs don't just drop out of the sky; they go through stages from initial concept to construction drawings. Greg Mulholland is no doubt aware of this, but it's in his interest to make his political opponents appear incompetent by asking detailed questions which can't possibly be answered yet.

£23m is clearly an initial estimate, but it does seem reasonable compared to recent new build stations.

 

[bradders1983]

Parkway station for an airport eh?

EM Parkway turned out well for the airport didnt it?

 

[bluenoxid]

Luton Airport Parkway wouldbe a better parallel for this proposal than EM Parkway. That has done much better as the proposals now out for tender demonstrate.

 

[Deerfold]

Parkway station for an airport eh?

EM Parkway turned out well for the airport didnt it?

EM Parkway was not promoted as an airport parkway station, but as a parkway for people to get to London. The timetable doesn't help with that, with two closely timed trains per hour.

 

[deltic08]

£23m is clearly an initial estimate, but it does seem reasonable compared to recent new build stations.

Get real. £23m for a two platform station? Rediculously expensive when very well appointed stations at Apperley Bridge and Kirkstall Forge cost only £8m each. Due to topography, the chosen site for this airport parkway station is less than ideal well below mean ground level, on a gradient where it would be difficult to build a car park and a mile from the airport. Who is going to get a train from Leeds to this station then transfer to a bus for onward journey to catch a plane. Similarly from Harrogate when there is a through bus to the airport already.

Conversely who is going to park&ride, catch a bus a mile to a railway station and then take the train into Leeds. Not I.

 

[bluenoxid]

Depends what is being funded with the £23m?

I have FOI a document on a website that may help but some scammer has spoofed the email address and put a dodgy email on it.

Sorted

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/requ...ic_tr?nocache=incoming-953161#incoming-953161

It is interesting is the comment about who will use it. People don't seem bothered about walking down a half mile long bus shelter and then boarding through outdoor steps.

People don't seem bothered about the current arrangements for the car park bus.

The bus services are unreliable, affected by chronic urban traffic congestion and inconsistent. The train has a set charge, better reliability and a timetable!

 

[Grumpy]

Given the scheme has only just been proposed, it's not much of a surprise that details are scarce. Fully engineered station designs don't just drop out of the sky; they go through stages from initial concept to construction drawings.
.

All very true but the point is they shouldn't be committing to the project until they have a firm idea as to likely cost. Taking some averaged costs from past projects elsewhere and assuming they will give you a future cost and is too cavalier. That's why we have the GWML shambles and have put future electrification projects at risk.

They should have said they think the project has merit but are to take time to plan it -including all the site acquisition costs they haven't yet given any thought to. When it's designed get a quantity surveyor to look at it and give a cost including all the specific site abnormals. Then compare the cost with the likely benefits and only then commit to the project.

 

[numero uno]

Plenty of people drive from Harrogate into Leeds and find parking now. The road into Leeds (Scott Hall Road) is probably one of the relatively least congested.

If this is Leeds money to be spent on benefitting Leeds then getting current Harrogate car commuters to leave their cars at Pannal and reduce car use in Leeds would be a good use. Although I accept political reality.

With regard to the alleged Cookridge airport links this all sounds very similar to the benefits that were claimed when the Parkway station was being proposed near to East Midlands airport. The reality is that the bus from Parkway to Airport has basically withered to an infrequent 6 seater minibus running for a few hours/day. Meanwhile the direct bus services from the centres of Nottingham/Derby and Leicester continue to thrive.

I live in Harrogate and work in Leeds. Plenty of people do drive into Leeds and there is ample parking, however, the traffic is horrendous and parking is expensive.

From my experience:

Car - If I set off closer to 7am it will take significantly less time, probably about 50 minutes but after 7:15 it will take over an hour. The two spots where traffic is worst are the approach to Harewood, where the lights in the centre of Harewood cause massive tailbacks, and Scott Hall Road, where congestion builds up around every single roundabout. Alternatively I can use the M1 which is sometimes a little bit quicker. Parking costs at least £6.50 plus fuel of around £15-£20 per week and I also have a 10 minute walk to my office. All told door to door it's at best 1 hour, at worst 1.5 hours and costs about £50 per week.

Bus - According to the timetable i'd have to leave my house around 7:30 to catch a bus into Harrogate and then get the 36 into Leeds to arrive at Park Row for 8:48. In reality though, like with the car, the bus gets caught up in traffic at Harewood meaning I need to set off much earlier in order to arrive at work on time. Best time at 1 hour 18 minutes is worse than the car but at £102 for a monthly ticket it's significantly cheaper. The bus also has comfy leather seats, plenty of leg room, air con and free wifi.

Train - Leave my house at 7:50, hop on the train and arrive in Leeds at 8:40 with a 5 minute walk to work. It's £168 for a monthly ticket which is more expensive than the bus but still cheaper than the car. At 55 minutes door to door it's also the quickest option. The issues I have with the train though are that they are always overcrowded, the seats are uncomfortable (leg room ranges from seats to where I can just fit my legs in to ones where I am sat in the fetal position) and they break down a lot.

If the promised improvements to the trains come to fruition (more frequency, nicer trains with wifi, etc) then they will rival the buses for comfort. To get people out of their cars though they are going to need to build a park and ride somewhere before Harewood. Pannal would be a good idea but I don't see where you could build one. LBA is no good because you will still get stuck in traffic coming out of Pool, which has the same congestion issues as Harewood. The best place to put a park and ride is Arthington/Pool which means people would exit their cars just before the two big traffic bottlenecks, Harewood and the A660/A658 junction outside Pool. Removing a decent chunk of that traffic also means the buses can run quicker which is likely to encourage more people onto the bus as well as the train.

The Harrogate line is always busy, even at off peak times the trains are mostly full, and i've noticed more and more people getting on the train over the last few years. However, a lot of the congestion on the trains is caused by passengers getting on and off at Horsforth/Headingley/Burley Park. Trains will be rammed door to door leaving Leeds but once they leave Horsforth there is usually seating for everyone. As mentioned previously in this thread, having express trains that didn't stop at those three stations with a separate service to Horsforth for Leeds based commuters would alleviate a lot of the over crowding issues. The problem at the minute is that they have the turnback service and the normal service so Leeds based commuters just hop on whatever is departing soonest. Take away one of those options and you separate the Leeds commuters from the N Yorks commuters which should means less crowded trains.

Of course, once LBA is up and running then to have this work most effectively you'd want the turnback facility at LBA rather than Horsforth.

 

[lejog]

If the promised improvements to the trains come to fruition (more frequency, nicer trains with wifi, etc) then they will rival the buses for comfort. To get people out of their cars though they are going to need to build a park and ride somewhere before Harewood. Pannal would be a good idea but I don't see where you could build one. LBA is no good because you will still get stuck in traffic coming out of Pool, which has the same congestion issues as Harewood. The best place to put a park and ride is Arthington/Pool which means people would exit their cars just before the two big traffic bottlenecks, Harewood and the A660/A658 junction outside Pool. Removing a decent chunk of that traffic also means the buses can run quicker which is likely to encourage more people onto the bus as well as the train.

I don't think for one moment that the new station is designed to attract car drivers from Harrogate. According to the document linked to by bluenoxid the initial proposals are for 150 car parking spaces and a short link road to the nearby unclassified Scotland Lane. This will hardly be a major park and ride station. Anyway its being funded by Leeds, not North Yorkshire.

The Harrogate line is always busy, even at off peak times the trains are mostly full, and i've noticed more and more people getting on the train over the last few years. However, a lot of the congestion on the trains is caused by passengers getting on and off at Horsforth/Headingley/Burley Park. Trains will be rammed door to door leaving Leeds but once they leave Horsforth there is usually seating for everyone. As mentioned previously in this thread, having express trains that didn't stop at those three stations with a separate service to Horsforth for Leeds based commuters would alleviate a lot of the over crowding issues. The problem at the minute is that they have the turnback service and the normal service so Leeds based commuters just hop on whatever is departing soonest. Take away one of those options and you separate the Leeds commuters from the N Yorks commuters which should means less crowded trains.

Of course, once LBA is up and running then to have this work most effectively you'd want the turnback facility at LBA rather than Horsforth.

There aren't any turnback trains planned, at least during the current franchise. From December there will be 2tph from Harrogate to Leeds calling at Horsforth only and 2tph from Knaresborough/York to Leeds calling at all stations. A timetable extract may be found here.

 

[bluenoxid]

I don't think for one moment that the new station is designed to attract car drivers from Harrogate. According to the document linked to by bluenoxid the initial proposals are for 150 car parking spaces and a short link road to the nearby unclassified Scotland Lane. This will hardly be a major park and ride station. Anyway its being funded by Leeds, not North Yorkshire.

The document I linked to was produced before these proposals were announced so I expect a change of design. The aim was to give an indication of what it could potentially look like.

 

[johntea]

The Harrogate line does get busy but the trick is working out which services are strengthened and aim for those, don't think I ever had any trouble getting a seat out of or returning to Leeds (returning I always tried to aim for one of the services that had come from Knaresborough rather than York too). Then again I cheated and travelled to Starbeck so on the return I beat the crowded platforms at Harrogate

Now I live in Starbeck and enjoy a 5 minute walking commute to work!

 

[deltic08]

The Harrogate line is always busy, even at off peak times the trains are mostly full, and i've noticed more and more people getting on the train over the last few years. However, a lot of the congestion on the trains is caused by passengers getting on and off at Horsforth/Headingley/Burley Park. Trains will be rammed door to door leaving Leeds but once they leave Horsforth there is usually seating for everyone. As mentioned previously in this thread, having express trains that didn't stop at those three stations with a separate service to Horsforth for Leeds based commuters would alleviate a lot of the over crowding issues. The problem at the minute is that they have the turnback service and the normal service so Leeds based commuters just hop on whatever is departing soonest. Take away one of those options and you separate the Leeds commuters from the N Yorks commuters which should means less crowded trains.

Of course, once LBA is up and running then to have this work most effectively you'd want the turnback facility at LBA rather than Horsforth.

A turnback facility was renewed and upgraded at Horsforth costing £8.5m during Leeds-Harrogate resignalliing. There has been much talk of extending this up the hill to LBA as heavy rail. Some say the gradient would be too steep at 1 in 40ish using adhesion alone despite Lickey Incline being 1 in 37.5 Others suggest light rail and tram trains. No-one has suggested extending at 1 in 50 to an island platform station and car park on Scotland Lane near the long stay car park for P&R only with monorail or cable car up the steepest part from here to the terminal building. Plans for two platforms on Harrogate Loop and access road could be scrapped.

 

[jayah]

A turnback facility was renewed and upgraded at Horsforth costing £8.5m during Leeds-Harrogate resignalliing. There has been much talk of extending this up the hill to LBA as heavy rail. Some say the gradient would be too steep at 1 in 40ish using adhesion alone despite Lickey Incline being 1 in 37.5 Others suggest light rail and tram trains. No-one has suggested extending at 1 in 50 to an island platform station and car park on Scotland Lane near the long stay car park for P&R only with monorail or cable car up the steepest part from here to the terminal building. Plans for two platforms on Harrogate Loop and access road could be scrapped.

Clearly fixed rail was never going to be recommended after spending £8.5m on a turnback, back at Horsforth.

The Parkway has obviously been picked because politicians must be seen to be doing something and it is the only option other than the eminently sensible shuttle bus that would cost less than around £200m. Luton, which has 10x the number of passengers as LBA is looking at a similar sum for their link to replace the current bus.

There are already 3 stations miles of LBA. LBA is also peculiar in that people are coming from 3 directions, though Bradford would not be helped at all by a £20m Cookridge station.

There seems to be plenty of dead land around both Horsforth and Apperley Bridge - get the shuttle bus put in - you could run it with the interest from the £20m not wasted on a new station.

 

[bluenoxid]

Providing a rail branch that goes half way is not feasible.

I agree, Horsforth could be upgraded.

Apperley Bridge looks good but the traffic congestion can be atrocious in that area.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

The original Horsforth Woodside railway station closed in 1864.

 

[DarloRich]

A turnback facility was renewed and upgraded at Horsforth costing £8.5m during Leeds-Harrogate resignalliing. There has been much talk of extending this up the hill to LBA as heavy rail. Some say the gradient would be too steep at 1 in 40ish using adhesion alone despite Lickey Incline being 1 in 37.5 Others suggest light rail and tram trains. No-one has suggested extending at 1 in 50 to an island platform station and car park on Scotland Lane near the long stay car park for P&R only with monorail or cable car up the steepest part from here to the terminal building. Plans for two platforms on Harrogate Loop and access road could be scrapped.

that is pie in the sky fantasy land stuff though! A shuttle form the parkway seems sensible if expensive. It works, and works well, at Luton which is a much busier airport than Leeds Bradford.

 

[Grumpy]

that is pie in the sky fantasy land stuff though! A shuttle form the parkway seems sensible if expensive. It works, and works well, at Luton which is a much busier airport than Leeds Bradford.

I'm not sure you can predict future outcomes just based on the volumes of airport users. It may be viable at Luton because that has approx. three times the numbers of passengers as Leeds. However East Midlands has approx. 25% more passengers than Leeds and the airport link doesn't seem to be a great success there.

 

[Grumpy]

. Pannal would be a good idea but I don't see where you could build one. .

I had in mind something a few hundred yards east of the present station with direct access from the A61, approximately opposite ATS, and with a 500 space car park (which Apperley Bridge should have had).

I'm not sure what's happening with the Pannal Business Park to the rear of the Nortbound platform. Much of the old property seems disused but some development is taking place at the southern end with the new A61 access and care home. The new access road seems designed to cater for more development. Ideally the council should have given the owners/developers planning permission subject to them providing land for a big car park next to the station.

ps-an excellent first post Numero Uno

 

[bluenoxid]

I'm not sure you can predict future outcomes just based on the volumes of airport users. It may be viable at Luton because that has approx. three times the numbers of passengers as Leeds. However East Midlands has approx. 25% more passengers than Leeds and the airport link doesn't seem to be a great success there.

I started a thread on this point. Luton wasn't that big in the mid nineties. It was the same size as Leeds Bradford today

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=143386

 

[quantinghome]

All very true but the point is they shouldn't be committing to the project until they have a firm idea as to likely cost. Taking some averaged costs from past projects elsewhere and assuming they will give you a future cost and is too cavalier. That's why we have the GWML shambles and have put future electrification projects at risk.

They should have said they think the project has merit but are to take time to plan it -including all the site acquisition costs they haven't yet given any thought to. When it's designed get a quantity surveyor to look at it and give a cost including all the specific site abnormals. Then compare the cost with the likely benefits and only then commit to the project.

They have made an initial public announcement of the plan. It's not an irrevocable commitment. It's quite normal for scheme promoters to do this. I daresay that other new stations were announced to the public well before detailed costs were developed. Would you prefer the council makes no announcements of their plans until the construction drawings are done and contracts signed? Hardly a recipe for democratic accountability.

 

[Deerfold]

I'm not sure you can predict future outcomes just based on the volumes of airport users. It may be viable at Luton because that has approx. three times the numbers of passengers as Leeds. However East Midlands has approx. 25% more passengers than Leeds and the airport link doesn't seem to be a great success there.

As i already said,

EM Parkway was not promoted as an airport parkway station, but as a parkway for people to get to London. The timetable doesn't help with that, with two closely timed trains per hour.

East Midlands Airport also has up to 5 buses an hour to Nottingham, 4 to Loughborough, 2 to Derby, 2 to Leicester so many people can use these to get to the airport faster and with fewer changes.

 

[Cakestall]

I suspect that any parkway station at Cookridge is a Trojan Horse with very little to do with serving the airport. A new road to connect the proposed station to LBA will be required and this will then form the new green belt boundary. Horsforth will then expand north to this point. Any development will get the nod as there will be a new station in place.
Horsforth rather comically came around seventh in some daft newspaper based "best places to live in the UK survey",(it's about the seventh best place to live in Leeds never mind the UK). But It is the place where many people want to live, especially people who want to buy new build suburban homes on the Green Belt rather than redevelopments on Brownfield sites.

 

[deltic08]

that is pie in the sky fantasy land stuff though! A shuttle form the parkway seems sensible if expensive. It works, and works well, at Luton which is a much busier airport than Leeds Bradford.

Maybe it does work well at Luton, but Luton airport is not on a hill 600 feet up, is not 200 feet above a parkway railway station only just over a mile away. You are not comparing like with like.

 

[Bantamzen]

A turnback facility was renewed and upgraded at Horsforth costing £8.5m during Leeds-Harrogate resignalliing. There has been much talk of extending this up the hill to LBA as heavy rail. Some say the gradient would be too steep at 1 in 40ish using adhesion alone despite Lickey Incline being 1 in 37.5 Others suggest light rail and tram trains. No-one has suggested extending at 1 in 50 to an island platform station and car park on Scotland Lane near the long stay car park for P&R only with monorail or cable car up the steepest part from here to the terminal building. Plans for two platforms on Harrogate Loop and access road could be scrapped.

Just keeping that box of crayons and the map open for a moment, if it where possible to get a heavy rail solution up at least part of the incline towards the long stay car park, would it not be better to seek a 'final mile' engineering solution to bring the line closer to the terminal building? Say a short bored or cut & covered section, rather than abandoning the line some distance away?

Clearly fixed rail was never going to be recommended after spending £8.5m on a turnback, back at Horsforth.

The Parkway has obviously been picked because politicians must be seen to be doing something and it is the only option other than the eminently sensible shuttle bus that would cost less than around £200m. Luton, which has 10x the number of passengers as LBA is looking at a similar sum for their link to replace the current bus.

There are already 3 stations miles of LBA. LBA is also peculiar in that people are coming from 3 directions, though Bradford would not be helped at all by a £20m Cookridge station.

There seems to be plenty of dead land around both Horsforth and Apperley Bridge - get the shuttle bus put in - you could run it with the interest from the £20m not wasted on a new station.

There has long been talk about shuttle buses from various stations around LBA, but that's all they ever have been. Frankly looking at the current bus services from Leeds (3ph) and Bradford (2ph) they carry few actual LBA using passengers, so don't indicate much desire at the moment for any kind of shuttle service. It doesn't help of course that the 737/747/757s act as all stopping services, and traveling along some of the region's busiest roads & regularly suffering delays. But then I can't ever remember there being any limited stop services regularly serving the airport, even National Express service to the North East have never served there as far as I can remember.

Frankly, and at the risk of getting the crayons out again, the only long term viable solution for LBA would be some kind of tunneled heavy rail one, and to have even a glint of hope for funding it would have to be part of a much wider scheme, say a new link between Leeds/Bradford > LBA > Otley > Harrogate and perhaps even a reinstated Ripon > Northallerton > NE link. But we would be talking serious amounts of money and a very long time away making it highly unlikely.

 

[quantinghome]

Maybe it does work well at Luton, but Luton airport is not on a hill 600 feet up, is not 200 feet above a parkway railway station only just over a mile away. You are not comparing like with like.

I'm not clear what point you're trying to make, but you might want to check some elevations:

Luton Airport: 160m
Luton Airport parkway: 105-110m

Leeds-Bradford Airport: 200m
Proposed parkway: ~120m

 

[HowardGWR]

I'm not clear what point you're trying to make, but you might want to check some elevations:

Luton Airport: 160m
Luton Airport parkway: 105-110m

Leeds-Bradford Airport: 200m
Proposed parkway: ~120m

Erm, Deltic08 did write feet.