Local Consultation on NGT
The 2013 Survey
- The NGT consultation conducted for Metro in 2008 concluded that there was support
for the introduction of trolleybuses if they provided improvements to public transport
(but note that the poll was taken before any scheme had been worked up in detail)
- A further survey carried out for Metro in 2009 showed that 77% of people supported
the introduction of a trolleybus-based scheme, although at the time this included an East
route to St James' hospital and a City Centre loop not just the currently proposed North and South routes.
- Information events conducted by Metro in 2012/13 invited detailed comments on their
plans but it was made clear that, although design details might be altered, the basic concept -
introduction of a trolleybus service running along the A660 separate from the existing bus
service - was not negotiable. Information in the public domain at that time promised that
the scheme would "help tackle congestion and reduce pollution in Leeds", and that "90% of t
he funding for NGT would come from Central Government and 10% would come from local sources".
- It was clear, in early 2013, that many residents and small businesses in North West
Leeds thought that they had not been consulted on the scheme which had recently submitted
to Central Government. Community associations in north-west Leeds therefore combined to
distribute a new questionnaire, worded to replicate the 2009 survey, to gauge the
reaction of residents to the scheme now being proposed.
- A copy of the Opinion Survey form can be seen here.
- 3,450 questionnaires were distributed and 893 were returned, a return rate of 26%.
- The results can be seen here.
- The headline result is that 95% of respondents were opposed or strongly opposed to
the proposed trolley bus scheme, with only 3% supporting it.
- Although no survey can claim to be entirely representative, the drop in support
from 77% (in 2009) to 3% (in 2013) suggests that, now that the implications of the trolleybus
proposal is beginning to be understood, the public response is becoming clear - they don't
Every effort has been made to try to ensure that the information provided on this
website is correct. If it is felt that any detail is incorrect,
please contact us at email@example.com