White Heather
Elite Pro-Member
Prolonging the CLEUD process doesn't reduce the likelihood of success, because success depends on whether or not the airport can show that there's been an error in the application and interpretation of the planning consent either by the council or inspector, or both. If there has, they could win the case, and if there hasn't then it's pointless and a waste of money. No doubt LBAs legal advisors will push the airport one way or the other. They certainly don't want to go to court, lose, and end up paying not only their fees but the Council too, and 'that lot', assuming they beg, borrow and steal enough to go to court . Not only that but they'll be no further forward.The CLUEDs were first submitted to the council on 6 September 2023. In September 2023, the airport probably assumed they were 3 years away from triggering the “within 12 months of reaching 4.5m passengers….” planning application. The expectation was that the council would give a decision in 6-8 weeks, so I think you have to look at it through that lens and why the CLUED approach made sense at the time.
But its taken nearly 2 years to get to this stage, and the airport is now much closer to triggering the 4.5m passenger limit and the need for a new planning application. On that basis, prolonging the CLUED process for another few years - with an ever decreasing likelihood of success - doesn’t make much sense to me. But I guess we’ll wait and see.
As you say, they are probably going to have to submit a planning application within 12 months relating to S106 so they may as well include a change in night hours to 0600-2330, pointing out the council approved those hours only a few years ago as part of the new terminal scheme. It would strange to now refuse the same hours they previously approved. The fact that without the expected
increase in pax (a possibility unless these night hours are resolved) the Council won't get their pound of flesh from LBA might focus their attention..
The big issue is though that the new planning application will, in all probability, result in approval being given but only with some other form of control included, such as a passenger cap. Presumably 7m as that's always been the figure quoted. Councils like passenger caps. LBA won't like it, but airport growth always seems to be a case of take what you can now, and deal with the future in the future! LBA are doing that just now - dealing with the fall out from 24H approval over 30 years ago and it's coming back to bite! The irony is of course that back then, LBA were part owned by Leeds City Council!
Last edited: