Leeds Bradford: Airport Road, Rail & Access Issues

Use this prefix for new threads for Leeds Bradford Airport
And just to add to all the current negative news, I have just seen a news link claiming that the affordability of the Parkway Station is being reviewed. Not been able to access the article
Not sure that is new news - WYCA about 6 months ago tasked the project with looking at other designs with a view to reducing the project cost.
 
Look on the bright side, the cheaper it is to build the new station the more money there will be available to build motorway standard cycle lanes that hardly anyone will use.
You aren’t far wrong😮 Which is actually quite alarming….Looking for new in the Parkway station I had a trawl through the recent WYCA meeting minutes. I it reveals millions to be spent on cycle lanes, more money spent on active travel in Leeds and elsewhere and a shed load of cash to be splurged on buying new buses and the compulsory purchase of bus garages for the Mayors Weaver network! Absolutely madness……All this on top of the clowns at Leeds City Council now looking to implement charging city centre business £,2000 Pa for each parking space on their own premises!!
 
The Stray Ferret has a news article saying "Mayor backs £42m Leeds Bradford Airport interchange" but the article is behind a pay wall. Can anybody shed any light on this?
The best I could do:
David Skaith, mayor of York and North Yorkshire, lent his support to the scheme. The Mayor of York and North Yorkshire has reiterated his support for a £42 million plan to build a rail station on the Harrogate line that would connect with Leeds Bradford Airport despite it being reviewed for affordability reasons.
 
The best I could do:
David Skaith, mayor of York and North Yorkshire, lent his support to the scheme. The Mayor of York and North Yorkshire has reiterated his support for a £42 million plan to build a rail station on the Harrogate line that would connect with Leeds Bradford Airport despite it being reviewed for affordability reasons.
Does the article state its being reviewed for 'affordability reasons?'

My understanding is that every such proposal under goes a cost/benefit analysis at this stage in the process.
 
Does the article state its being reviewed for 'affordability reasons?'

My understanding is that every such proposal under goes a cost/benefit analysis at this stage in the process.
I couldn’t access the full article, just the above clip.
However, my understanding is that it is (or was) being reviewed in light affordability as the council were expecting a large contribution under the last Government (from memory some kind of second round of funding) which didn’t materialise.
I have since retired and no longer have access to my work emails which were used in my correspondence with the council and planners.
I don’t think the White Rose Station debacle has helped either.
 
I couldn’t access the full article, just the above clip.
However, my understanding is that it is (or was) being reviewed in light affordability as the council were expecting a large contribution under the last Government (from memory some kind of second round of funding) which didn’t materialise.
I have since retired and no longer have access to my work emails which were used in my correspondence with the council and planners.
I don’t think the White Rose Station debacle has helped either.
It's so typical of West Yorkshire that a station at a shopping centre is seen as more of a priority than a station for its airport along with a badly needed park and ride scheme for this area of Leeds which would relieve the pressure on Horsforth Station, the busiest in Leeds other than Leeds City. And they're planning to send the tram to the White Rose Centre too!

The airport Parkway Station isn't dead, but it's certainly true that WYCA are reviewing it and trying to reduce costs. The problem is that the station and park and ride need road access and a car park/bus terminal ( for airport buses) so it's not just sbout the actual station. Had they not scrapped the relief road scheme a few years back this station scheme wouldn't need to be as expensive as it is now, although Vince Hodder said the quoted costs were far higher than they should be.

There's also the issue of several compulsory purchases of land in order to access the station and the rescheduling of trains which apparently isn't as straightforward as it sounds.

As usual, it's taking forever. No doubt if/when they revise the scheme to reduce costs, they'll have yet another consultation, wasting more time and some of the savings.
 
It's so typical of West Yorkshire that a station at a shopping centre is seen as more of a priority than a station for its airport along with a badly needed park and ride scheme for this area of Leeds which would relieve the pressure on Horsforth Station, the busiest in Leeds other than Leeds City. And they're planning to send the tram to the White Rose Centre too!

The airport Parkway Station isn't dead, but it's certainly true that WYCA are reviewing it and trying to reduce costs. The problem is that the station and park and ride need road access and a car park/bus terminal ( for airport buses) so it's not just sbout the actual station. Had they not scrapped the relief road scheme a few years back this station scheme wouldn't need to be as expensive as it is now, although Vince Hodder said the quoted costs were far higher than they should be.

There's also the issue of several compulsory purchases of land in order to access the station and the rescheduling of trains which apparently isn't as straightforward as it sounds.

As usual, it's taking forever. No doubt if/when they revise the scheme to reduce costs, they'll have yet another consultation, wasting more time and some of the savings.
There is a long standing problem in the UK with projects which require public funding.
Nearly every one in recent years has been over budget and overdue.
I have no idea why contractors are not held firmly to their quotes and breaks inserted which forces them offsite should they start asking for more money or time.
These large companies simply see the public funds as a way to print money and it is a systemic failure of successive governments (some members of whom may have benefited from the contracts personally) to spend our money as if it were their own.
Don’t get me started on the PPE scandal. I hope Michelle Mone finds herself in clink sooner rather than later.
It was ever thus.
Time for a cuppa 😁
 
There is a long standing problem in the UK with projects which require public funding.
Nearly every one in recent years has been over budget and overdue.
I have no idea why contractors are not held firmly to their quotes and breaks inserted which forces them offsite should they start asking for more money or time.
These large companies simply see the public funds as a way to print money and it is a systemic failure of successive governments (some members of whom may have benefited from the contracts personally) to spend our money as if it were their own.
Don’t get me started on the PPE scandal. I hope Michelle Mone finds herself in clink sooner rather than later.
It was ever thus.
Time for a cuppa 😁
If a contract is let properly, it leaves little room for contractors to increase costs once their tender has been accepted. The problem with these schemes is that they haven't even got to the tender stage. Costs are estimated but then they have a consultation, and by the time that's done, costs have increased with inflation, so they revise the scheme to save money then do another consultation after which costs have increased again.

Fact. The longer it takes to start a project, the higher the cost. I speak from experience as a project sponsor who had the responsibility for ensuring value for money and as a multi million pound contract manager.
 
If a contract is let properly, it leaves little room for contractors to increase costs once their tender has been accepted. The problem with these schemes is that they haven't even got to the tender stage. Costs are estimated but then they have a consultation, and by the time that's done, costs have increased with inflation, so they revise the scheme to save money then do another consultation after which costs have increased again.

Fact. The longer it takes to start a project, the higher the cost. I speak from experience as a project sponsor who had the responsibility for ensuring value for money and as a multi million pound contract manager.
I presume a contract can be agreed with a clause allowing inflation to be considered as a factor over the agreed length of the project? It doesn’t seem particularly complicated to me.
There’s too much “convenient” flexibility written and agreed into these deals. The people calling the shots should be the public officials, not the contractors.
 
I presume a contract can be agreed with a clause allowing inflation to be considered as a factor over the agreed length of the project? It doesn’t seem particularly complicated to me.
There’s too much “convenient” flexibility written and agreed into these deals. The people calling the shots should be the public officials, not the contractors.
The contractor should be pricing their tender realistically to allow for current costs, expected increased costs over the contract period , and for unforseen costs, known as contingencies. This might cover unexpected issues such as the discovery of asbestos, although if there's a possibility of that, a survey should have been done. The problems arise where contractors bid too low in an attempt to win the tender. Usually this is due to them not including various costs that are likely to arise, such as out of hours working, security , or other issues. If the project QS and Architect just opt for the cheapest tender without spotting these omissions, it gives the contractor licence to print money if they then need to undertake these tasks - known as dayworks. That's why a good design team will not only crawl all over a tender, but interview the contractor in depth to ensure the contract covers everything. It will often even include penalties against the contractor for delays in reaching milestones or completion.

A weak contract leads to a poor and usually expensive outcome. However, we seem unable to even get to the tender stage! Design, cost, consultation, redesign, re-cost, consultation again, and now a possible redesign and re-cost again, no doubt leading to a further consultation. Its ridiculous, inefficient and expensive.
 
There’s too much “convenient” flexibility written and agreed into these deals. The people calling the shots should be the public officials, not the contractors.


The problem with that is contractors ie private companies tend to be smarter than public officials a good example is the RAF Wedgetail programme. The MOD ordered five radar sets from Northrop Grumman later reduced it to three and then discovered they were on the hook for all five at £60 million a pop.

It all helps the black holes they keep finding-HS2 anyone!
 
Last edited:
The problem with with that is contractors ie private companies tend to be smarter than public officials a good example is the RAF Wedgetail programme. The MOD ordered five radar sets from Northrop Grumman later reduced it to three and then discovered they were on the hook for all five at 60 million a pop.

It all helps the black holes they keep finding-HS2 anyone!
I think some of the “black hole” money finds it way into the occasional account held by public officials.
I remember back in the 80/90s and it was discovered that the 4/5 largest contractors used to meet up before bidding for Gov work and agree a generally inflated cost and then which one’s turn it was to bid slightly under and win the contract.
Hospitals, motorways, all the big infrastructure was overpaid for by years and the companies were fined and allowed to continue biddding.
To show how much has changed, Fujitsu, who were behind the Post Office scandal, have won contracts for Gov work since it was exposed. They haven’t even compensated the victims yet.
It’s disgraceful, it’s immoral and , in my opinion, it’s corrupt.
 
Should have just built the road that was originally proposed and linked it to the ring road just below Horsforth Roundabout - this would have not only improved access to LBA but would have significantly improved the traffic at the roundabout….. instead as usual LCC stalled and decided on the rail link which will have questionable benefits….
Now years since WYCA published this and as usual zero progress…https://ehq-production-europe.s3.eu...e210999fec53791922e26c72a47b6cd6a263b92ca7f84
 
Last edited:

Remove Advertisements

Subscribe to help support your favourite forum and in return we'll remove all our advertisements. Your contribution will help to pay for things like site maintenance, domain name renewals and annual server charges.



Forums4aiports
Subscribe

Heads Up!

i must be a lunatic. Friday 25th Sept will see me doing a daytrip that involves me leaving my flat in Manchester at 1am and not getting back home until after midnight. All because I'm doing a Loch Ness and Scottish Highlands trip.... out of Glasgow
For some weird reason, my days off work tend to involve being out of my flat by 5am and not getting back until 10pm. Back to work and the regular "fix" of 7.40am to 7.15pm hours
Heatwave Mk2 next week?
Some explosive weather build-ups currently in the North of England. What is it like where you are?
LBA: B737-300 G-GDFK empty down to Paris at 16:15 to operate the return LS268 back to Leeds 20:00 ETA where it will then operate the delayed LS265 to Malaga 20:40ETD

Advertisement

Back
Top Bottom
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Sure, ad-blocking software does a great job at blocking ads, but it also blocks some useful and important features of our website. For the best possible site experience please take a moment to disable your AdBlocker.