Poor Value for Money
- £250 million for 20 trolleybuses on a single 9 mile route.
- 90% of the £250 million is for highways works.
- Nottingham built the same length of tramline for £229 million in today’s money
Invalid Economic Argument
- Metro claim that the trolleybus scheme would create 4,000 jobs. But according to the National Audit Office, Sheffield’s larger Supertram scheme created just 1,600 jobs.
- Metro claim NGT would increase house prices. But when Supertram was proposed, people couldn’t sell their houses as no one wanted to live beside overhead wires and gantries.
- By degrading the environment, the trolleybus scheme would make the A660 corridor a far less attractive place to establish a business.
Dangerous to Cyclists and Pedestrians
- Pavements would be narrowed.
- The trolleybuses would be bendybuses on narrow roads ill-suited to bendybuses.
- The route is across Monument Moor and the fields on Headingley Hill.
- Broad grass verges in Far Headingley and the central reservation between the West Park roundabout and Lawnswood would be tarmaced over.
- Loss of greenspace.
- Loss of over 400 mature trees.
- Light pollution at night from the park and rides at Bodington and Stourton and from the Headingley Bypass.
- To give the trolleybus priority at junctions, all other road users would be held in traffic stacks leading to increased emissions.
- Demolition of Victorian buildings.
- Road widening on Headingley Hill involving demolition and re-locations.
- Overhead cables attached to historic buildings.
- Street clutter from the many poles needed to suspend the overhead cables from.
- To give the trolleybus priority at junctions, all other road users would be held in traffic stacks leading to increased congestion.
Not an Improved Bus Service
- The trolleybuses would make half the number of stops as the existing buses.
- Metro say the number 1 and number 6 bus services would likely be halved.
- The trolleybus stops would not be coterminous with the existing stops.
- Passengers would have to choose which stop to walk to.
- The extra time taken to walk to trolleybus stops would cancel out the small time saving gained from giving the trolleybus priority at junctions.
Unlikely to be used
- Evidence shows an insignificant modal shift from cars to buses.
- The trolleybuses would carry 160 passengers, with seating for just 60.
- The time saving on the March 2012 number 1 bus journey from the city centre to Holt Park is either 1 or 3 minutes.
- Leeds already has two bus-based park and rides, which are not well-used. The evidence indicates that people only use bus-based park and rides when there is a shortage of city centre parking, as at York. Leeds by contrast, has plenty of city centre parking.
Alternatives Haven’t been Evaluated
- Metro has not evaluated battery-powered buses, tidal flows, a new tram system, or an underground.
Lack of public support
- Metro has failed to publish the results of its Autumn 2012 to Spring 2013 consultation exercise.
- There have bee numerous letters to the Yorkshire evening Post criticising the scheme.
- At four public meetings, there has been overwhelming opposition.
- Metro’s claim of public support for the scheme is based on a questionnaire with very little detail issued in 2009.