Welcome

David Robison 2 Comments

Welcome to the website for the Bradford-Shipley Travel Alliance. You can find out more about us here.

Please sign-up for our newsletter using the sign-up box on this page, if you agree with our concerns:

Any new road scheme between Bradford and Shipley must result in:

  • Significantly improved air quality and safety in all residential areas affected by the proposed scheme, including for all schools.
  • A response to the climate emergency including reduced carbon emissions, increased investment in public transport, walking and cycling, and less motor traffic overall.

We request that no further consultation goes ahead without information that shows how the intended benefits of the scheme will be guaranteed.

Have your say on WYCA’s Climate Plan and Transport

Admin Leave a comment

Our last newsletter reported that the Bradford-Shipley road schemes have been knocked back again for further changes, but have also run out of money.

Meanwhile West Yorkshire Combined Authority (WYCA) are consulting on their Climate and Environment Plan 2025-2028, including their plans for transport. They ask you to complete a survey here, by 31st January 2025.

We know it will be difficult to achieve the absolutely necessary aim of reducing carbon emissions in this region so that by 2038 they no longer add to global warming. The BSTA committee will attend WYCA events to support the transformations needed.

This email outlines our support and our concerns for WYCA’s plans. You can consider these when responding to their survey which we urge you to do, using your own words and priorities.

Roads change – part of climate action

Fires, hurricanes, and cars floating in flooded waters – these have become regular features of news about supposedly developed countries. It is now accepted that these catastrophes will accelerate and are a result of the fossil fuel economy that must be replaced. WYCA have adopted a ‘pathway’ to reducing carbon emissions which involves a major shift away from cars towards cheaper public transport and other travel modes.

The survey asks if you support a list of proposed actions

The WYCA survey asks you if you support actions in five areas including “Reliable, affordable, integrated, zero emission transport”. For each of the five areas, it asks if you support a list of planned actions WYCA will undertake, some themselves, some to offer support, some to encourage, and others to lobby central government to take on.

A list of actions is not enough

We think that the proposed objectives and actions are reasonable. However, they imply great changes in everyday life and in investment of public funds. They must be successful in shifting to new energy sources, and also successful in gaining most people’s support. We have three concerns that we will make in the Travel Alliance’s own response.

  1. To achieve a target of net zero carbon emissions by 2038, a live plan is needed, that adjusts and accelerates as needs be, not only a fixed list of activities. An annual reduction in carbon emissions must be stated and kept to. A carbon budget needs the accuracy and insistence of a financial budget. This is not yet mentioned in the plan’s actions. See below for further explanation of the importance of sticking to the carbon budget.
  2. The transformation of transport and other aspects of everyday lives means bringing most people along in support of major changes, and the media too. WYCA will need to promote many educators, mobilisers and supporters in all walks of life. This needs highlighting in the plan.
  3. WYCA’s recognition that others including central government will have to be lobbied and persuaded is realistic and welcome. It will require a strong team of negotiators, with strategic pressures of carrots and sticks to achieve change.

Completing the survey

When you open the survey, you will see it consists of just two text boxes for you to write in, one to comment on its five objectives, and another to comment on the list of actions it proposes in the five areas.

BSTA suggests you reply in your own words to support the actions you approve of – and we think they are all relevant and well-intentioned. We ask you to include the three points above, without which the actions cannot be enough and may not be possible to successfully implement.

There are also questions about your town and age and so on, which are optional.

Why the carbon budget is so important

WYCA’s new plan and pathway sets a carbon budget – a limit to the total fossil fuel pollution our region can emit between now and 2038. Like a financial budget, it’s essential we do not overspend this budget. The strategy needs to have a laser focus on reducing pollution over the next 5 years, to ensure we have a chance of staying within our budget. If there is less pollution reduction now, deeper savings are needed in later years. The danger of delay is that if we overspend in early years, the cuts needed in later years will become too deep and rapid to be feasible.

It is essential to know now what WYCA emissions were in 2023 and 2024. If progress in those years was not on track, then the strategy needs to become more ambitious immediately. The chart illustrates this. The area under the blue line is the total carbon budget allowed from 2022 to 2038. If there have not been reductions, then the extra emissions in recent years have to be clawed back in later years. The orange line is an example of the clawing back that is necessary – to make up for the extra emissions there has to be steeper drops than planned, so that the total carbon emissions are kept on target.

Best wishes for the new year, from the team at Bradford-Shipley Travel Alliance

And now what? Consultation finished on Bradford-Shipley roads

Admin Leave a comment

The proposal and the consultation
The major Bradford-Shipley road scheme which sparked Bradford-Shipley Travel Alliance into existence went back to the drawing board a year ago. This was a good thing for all those concerned about too much traffic on account of health and climate concerns.

New proposals had a rushed summer consultation in July 2024. BSTA moved to inform our now extensive mailing list and Bradford Council received a larger than expected response from around 1500 people.

Back to the drawing board again
BSTA were happy with the reduced role of widened roads but criticised the lack of evidence to support the proposals. This lack of evidence seems to have backfired on the Council and West Yorkshire Combined Authority (WYCA), because it had nothing to counter the substantial opposition in the consultation to rerouting traffic away from Manningham Lane.

WYCA have therefore asked Bradford Council to work up new proposals again, which may go out for another consultation in 2025. We will keep you informed.

What next?
We are waiting for WYCA’s climate plan, expected very soon. We think it will be ambitious and require a major shift from individual road traffic to public transport, cycling and walking. It will clearly affect all road schemes and BSTA will provide recommendations so that new Bradford-Shipley proposals suit the climate aims and local people’s needs.

In any case, there is no longer assured money for the Bradford-Shipley road schemes. Higher inflation in the past 2 years has reduced the number of projects that the West Yorkshire Transport Fund can deliver. WYCA do have funding to see the Bradford-Shipley scheme through its Outline Plan (the current stage) and once that has been finalised and approved then it will pay for a Full Business Case to specify in great detail what is proposed. But the scheme will then, according to a report to Bradford Council’s Regeneration and Environment Scrutiny Committee, go into the ‘pipeline’ of new projects awaiting other funding for delivery.
 
We wish all our readers a happy break at Christmas and New Year, and a 2025 that brings good news.

Respond this week to WYCA’s road proposals between Bradford and Shipley

Admin Leave a comment

What an unfortunate time for consultation on major road proposals for Bradford-Shipley! We issued guidance two weeks ago, encouraging you to respond to the WYCA Survey despite the short summer period it is open. All responses must be made by the end of this Sunday 18th August.

We think that some points must be underlined, in favour of the safety and health gains from less motor traffic and more support for bus, cycle and walking. There are powerful voices against change. We wish to support the best proposals and warn against proposals that may be harmful in Manningham, Frizinghall, and the bottleneck of Shipley. Every comment will be counted. You can also respond with an email (see below).

So please complete the WYCA survey questionnaire, making good use of the space for comments after the following three headings:

“Do you have any comments you’d like to tell us about the plans for these side roads?”

“If you wish to tell us why you do, or do not, like these general ideas for improvements, you can use the box below.”

“And finally, if there is anything else you’d like to tell us about these proposals, you can use the box below.”

We suggest you include the following comments if you agree with them. The more people who mention each priority, the more likely that the Council will be able to act on the comment, and weigh it against other comments that they receive.

  • I support discouragement of more traffic. This is an aim of WYCA’s own climate policy.
  • I support easier walking cycling bussing and safer streets.
  • Will a benefit be reduced motor traffic overall? I am concerned that widening Canal Road and stopping up some side roads may give extra capacity to the main road, attracting more traffic. Please ensure that the proposals result in less traffic.
  • Why is heavy goods traffic travelling through Bradford to the northwest not diverted to the motorway system?
  • The improved cycling routes must be joined up with existing routes?
  • How will the Carlisle/Marlborough/Lumb Lane road stretches cope with the diverted extra traffic?
  • Please publish the traffic and emissions forecasts showing that there will definitely be less traffic overall.
  • How will delivery vans to disabled residents of Manningham Lane and nearby manage to turn and deliver?
  • The widening of Canal Road at Midland Terrace will make access more difficult for residents, and crucially attract more traffic to the system, which is not healthy.

You can in addition write your comments in an email to yourvoice@westyorks-ca.gov.uk or by mail to Freepost, CONSULTATION TEAM WYCA, Wellington House, 40-50 Wellington Street, Leeds, LS1 2DE

For the other questions in the questionnaire we suggest you respond according to your views on each proposal. We have given guidance here if you wish to refer to it. Note that after Q5, the question numbers change according to how many roads you say that you use.

Guidance on consultation questionnaire

Admin Leave a comment

Bradford-Shipley Travel Alliance has advised its affiliated organisations and individuals to respond to WYCA’s questionnaire consultation on road schemes between Bradford and Shipley. The guidance is reproduced below. You may also write comments and concerns unconstrained by the questionnaire in an email to yourvoice@westyorks-ca.gov.uk or by mail to Freepost, CONSULTATION TEAM WYCA, Wellington House, 40-50 Wellington Street, Leeds, LS1 2DE.

Bradford-Shipley Road Improvement Scheme – Questionnaire consultation

We are asking you to complete the consultation questionnaire [bsta.us7.list-manage.com] issued by West Yorkshire Combined Authority about proposed changes to the road system between Bradford and Shipley.


Bradford-Shipley Travel Alliance was launched in 2021 to represent the concern from residents about road proposals. In particular, the dangerous health and climate impacts of increasing traffic across Manningham and Frizinghall and adding to the bottleneck of Shipley. The proposal then was for dual carriageway all along Canal Road, Valley Road and Otley Road.


Your concerns were influential. The Council decided to go back to the drawing board and take into account policies on improving air quality and encouraging a shift away from the motor car. The new proposal is better, but leaves many unanswered questions:


Will a benefit be reduced motor traffic overall? Why is heavy goods traffic travelling through Bradford to the northwest not diverted to the motorway system? Which road stop-ups and one-way systems make for safer communities or simply make the main roads faster? Will the improved stretches of cycling and walking be joined up? How will the Carlisle/Marlborough/Lumb Lane road stretches cope with the diverted extra traffic? Where are the numbers to justify the claims made for the proposals?


If residents’ health and tackling carbon emissions are your priorities, we ask you to respond to the consultation questionnaire and raise these points. Only then will Councillors hear your concerns and ensure that the scheme is further improved.


With this in mind, the rest of this document gives guidance on the questionnaire, you may of course have differing views on some elements, but we hope this will help you make response you are happy with.
When completing the questionnaire, think about your own experience and try to use your own words.
Guidance on the Bradford-Shipley roads consultation questionnaire
Take the survey here: https://www.yourvoice.westyorks-ca.gov.uk/bradfordshipley [bsta.us7.list-manage.com]


Qs 1-4 Introduction
BSTA Guidance: Complete according to your usage of any of the roads between Bradford and Shipley.
Side Road Proposals
Q5. Do you live, visit or travel along any of the roads we are proposing to stop up or make one-way?  Please tick all that apply
BSTA Guidance: These are the side roads that will be blocked or made one-way. Choose all of the roads you use, even if only occasionally. The questionnaire will then ask you about each of them. The map that shows the proposed changes is here [bsta.us7.list-manage.com] (do not be put off by the title that is mistakenly about Huddersfield canals!).


 [Note: the question numbers from here will differ, depending on how many side roads you ticked in Q5]
Q6 For each road you have said you use; you will then be asked to ‘Support’ or ‘Oppose’ the change.
BSTA guidance: Below, for Comments section that comes at the end of the questions about each road, we have given reasons to support these changes to side roads. However, in some cases the change may cause greater flow on the main road and may have a specific local effect without other benefits. You know the area and should answer accordingly.
 
Q7 Do you have any comments you’d like to tell us about the plans for these side roads? 
BSTA Guidance: Stopping-up some side roads on this route should help make walking safer and more appealing by creating longer stretches of continuous pavement with a reduced number of junctions for pedestrians to cross. Those travelling by foot will no longer need to cross multiple side roads when walking, for example, their children to school. 
Closed side roads so that they no longer have two-way traffic on them (effectively becoming cul-de-sacs) should make it safer for residents to move around on their streets and provide safer areas for children to walk and play.
Closing some side roads should also help with cycle safety once the new cycleways are in place. Fewer junctions will mean a longer continuous cycleway with fewer opportunities for negative cycle/motor vehicle interactions when motorists drive in and out of a side road. This should greatly improve cycle safety.
 
Q8. In general, how much do you support the principle of one-way / stopped up side roads off Manningham Lane / Bradford Road? 
 
BSTA Guidance: Support
 
Q9 We wish to make Manningham Lane a bit less car dominated and improve the reliability of buses. But making sure you can still visit businesses along the route easily.  
This means you would no longer be able to travel north from Spring Bank Place to Queens Road in a private vehicle. You would still be able to access businesses along Manningham Lane. 
Do you support or oppose adding a Bus Gate on Manningham Lane? 
 
BSTA Guidance: Support
 
Q10. We are planning reduce congestion along Queens Road to Manningham Lane, improve air quality and road safety. 
To do this, we wish to implement a no right turn restriction, so you wouldn’t be able to turn right from Queens Road onto Manningham Lane. 
How much do you support or oppose this no right turn proposal?  
 
BSTA Guidance: Support
 
Q11. In the previous consultation, you told us you were concerned about air quality.  
Do you feel our proposals would improve air quality in this area?  
 
BSTA Guidance: Yes
 
Q12. The A6037 Canal Road and the A6038 Otley Road are strategic roads for people travelling across the district. 
How much do you support the following proposals to improve and/ or widen these roads and junctions?  
Add a new lane northbound on Canal Road between Queens Road and Stanley Road in the existing highway 
 
BSTA Guidance: Strongly oppose
Improved access to Frizinghall Rail Station from Canal Road 
 
BSTA Guidance: Strongly Support
 
Widen Otley Road / Valley Road Junction to improve congestion 
 
BSTA Guidance: Oppose
 
Widen Otley Road / Keighley Road Junction to improve congestion 
BSTA Guidance: Oppose
 
Section Four 
More general proposals 
We also wish to make improvements more generally. 
The following proposals don’t have a specific place in mind right now.  
But we’d like to know if you’d support the following ideas in principle:  
 
Q13. Additional length / upgraded segregated cycleway 
 
BSTA Guidance: Strongly Support
 
Q14. Cycling crossing improvements 
 
BSTA Guidance: Strongly Support
 
Q15. Pedestrian crossing improvements 
 
BSTA Guidance: Strongly Support
Q16. Make the area a safer, more attractive place to walk and cycle 
 
BSTA Guidance: Strongly Support
 
Q17. Planting / landscaping improvements 
 
BSTA Guidance: Strongly Support
 
Q18. More bus lanes to improve bus journey times and reliability 
 
BSTA Guidance: Strongly Support
 
Q19. Bus lanes operating longer to improve bus journey times and reliability earlier and later 
 
BSTA Guidance: Strongly Support
 
Q20. Improved bus stop locations 
 
BSTA Guidance: Strongly Support
 
Q21. Enforcement against unlawful parking – to improve journey times, and improve road safety, walking and cycling 
 
BSTA Guidance: Strongly Support
 
 
 
Q22. If you wish to tell us why you do, or do not, like these general ideas for improvements, you can use the box below: 
 
BSTA Guidance:
There is much to support within the above listed general improvements.
Additional protected cycle lanes will make it easier and safer for people to cycle in the area. Encouraging more people to cycle in their community and replace car journeys with cycle journeys is good for health and good for reducing congestion, local air pollution and carbon emissions.
Improvements to pedestrian crossings will make it easier and safer for residents to walk in their community, for example to the shops or take their children to school on foot. Improvements to pedestrian crossings must however give adequate priority to pedestrians and cyclists, for example making the pedestrian/cycle phase as long as possible and consideration needs to be given to giving priority to pedestrians and cyclists rather than motorists.
Measures that make the area safer and more attractive to walk and cycle will encourage people to travel by foot or on bike in their community instead of by car. Again, this is good for health and good for reducing congestion, local air pollution and carbon emissions. This will also be positive for local businesses as residents are more likely to walk or cycle to the shops and spend more time in an area that has been made safer and more attractive for active travel (walking, wheeling and cycling). The same is the case for improving an area through planting and landscaping – this will again encourage people to spend time in the local area which is good for the community and good for local businesses.
Bus lanes that operate longer will help make bus travel quicker and more reliable. This will encourage more people to use the bus instead of their car and will reduce congestion, local air pollution and carbon emissions.
Well maintained, attractive bus stops located in user-friendly locations will help further encourage bus use.
Parking enforcement against unlawful parking is welcome. Unlawful parking can involve drivers parking on pavements, in bus lanes and on cycle paths. This makes walking more unpleasant, makes cycling more dangerous and slows buses down. Enforcement against unlawful parking will reduce these problems and encourage the uptake of walking and cycling as well as making these modes of travel safer.
 
 
Section Five 
Your thoughts on the full scheme  
Q23. Overall, how much do you support or oppose these proposals?  
 
BSTA Guidance: Support
 
Q24. And finally, if there is anything else you’d like to tell us about these proposals, you can use the box below:  
BSTA Guidance: The overall aims of the revised scheme are largely positive. The focus on bus and active travel is to be welcomed, as is the plan to make Manningham Lane/Keighley Road/Bradford Road into a reduced traffic, quieter neighbourhood area.
The decision to no longer widen long stretches of Canal Road and Valley Road is a very welcome change from the previous plan. There is however a concern that plans to create an extra lane on a stretch of Canal Road may induce additional traffic to use this road by creating additional vehicle capacity. This may lead to an increase in traffic that will negate some of the positive impacts of the scheme by causing additional air pollution and carbon emissions.  
The continued commitment to naturalising Bradford Beck is welcome.
Redirecting traffic from Manningham Lane onto Westgate/Carlisle/Rd/Marlborough Rd may have the effect of adding to congestion on these already busy roads. As these are largely residential areas this is a cause for concern.
Widening of junctions at Otley Rd/Valley Road and Keighley Rd/Otley Road risks inducing more motor vehicle traffic to use these junctions if the roads are widened to increase vehicle carrying capacity. This may increase congestion beyond the junctions and may worsen local air pollution and increase carbon emissions. However, if the junctions are widened to accommodate wider pavements and protected cycleways instead of additional vehicle carrying capacity this would be an improvement. Signalling upgrades that prioritised walking and cycling would also be welcomed.
The Otley Road/Valley Road junction is right next to Shipley CE Primary school. Any increase in road traffic here will result in increased air pollution which will have a negative effect on the developing lungs of children who attend this school. This would be a significant concern. There are a number of mature trees at the Otley Rd/Valley Road junction. It is not clear from the plans if these would need to be cut down to widen this junction. If so, this would be a cause for concern.
It is not clear how the walking proposals deliver a coherent network.
The cycleway extension to Frizinghall rail station along Stanley Road / Gaisby Lane is welcome, however there isn’t a corresponding protected cycleway running from Keighley Road down Frizinghall Road to the rail station to create a proper network.
It is noted that the project ends at Otley Rd junction at the Shipley end of the route rather than going on to Saltaire. It would make much more sense and would have much greater impact if the scheme continued to the Saltaire/Bingley Road shops so that there was a fully connected protected cycleway with improved footway joining the urban centres of Bradford and Saltaire. An active travel connection to Shipley centre is also missing.  Improved footways and protected cycleways into Shipley town centre down Otley Rd from Bradford Road towards Shipley town centre would connect the local residential areas off Bradford/Bingley/Keighley Road with the centre of Shipley. This would encourage cycle commuting for shopping/work/leisure as well as enhancing the walking experience between Shipley and nearby residential areas.
A HGV weight ban is not included in the proposals. A weight ban that resulted in the redirection of HGVs onto the motorway network would have significant benefits in reducing the high numbers of HGVs that use the Bradford-Shipley route.
 

Kind regards The Bradford-Shipley Travel Alliance team

Public consultation at last! Bradford Shipley roads changes

Admin Leave a comment

The long-awaited proposals for changes to Valley Road/Canal Road and Manningham Lane/Keighley Road/Bradford Road are about to be published by West Yorkshire Combined Authority.

BSTA has alerted its almost 500 community residents and organisations from around Manningham, Frizinghall, Owlet and Shipley who have provided their contact details to be made aware of plans for the roads between Bradford and Shipley.

A public consultation is expected to start on Monday 22nd July and last four weeks. This is the height of the holiday period, and affected schools will not be able to be consulted. 

When we have had a chance to review the proposals, we will send you guidance on how to respond. We will be looking to protect the safety of local communities, improve air quality, and reduce the health and carbon impact of traffic through better alternatives – buses, bikes and walking.

It appears that the Council has listened to public concerns and dropped plans to turn Canal Road/Valley Road into a four lane highway. We await their formally published plan.