Search results

I may be wrong (often am) but I don't think it really comes down to choice or politics? I think that so long as it's within policies set by the council themselves they will likely have to approve else risk losing at large expense in appeal?

Least they didn't accompany it with the usual photo of a small plane landing in cross winds!

Sorry if already reported but expiry date updated from 30/11 to 15/1 not sure what that means for the process... https://publicaccess.leeds.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=dates&keyVal=Q9SM3LJBKXX00 Regarding negatively publicity having no impact on the panel I'm...

The mad thing is they state a hit to the economy linked by West Yorks folk going on holiday from expanded LBA. But then oddly assume if LBA doesn't expand all those people won't know they could take a holiday via Manc which is a double hit to the West Yorkshire economy

Confirmation the cost of the Parkway station has ballooned to £42m! Item 12 table 2 https://democracy.leeds.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=102&MId=9978&Ver=4 Utter madness when they costed direct heavy rail link at "upto £100m" and the new terminal is much less distance from the rail line so...

You'd think the airport route would be ideal for electric buses... Plenty of time to recharge at either end of the route between journeys... Less stop/start etc...

I think the reality of the planning process is that job creation and other factors we value are unimportant...

Really clear confirmation from the airport for all those objecting on environmental grounds https://www.leeds-live.co.uk/news/leeds-news/leeds-bradford-airport-boss-says-18433211.amp

Still never forgiven my fellow students that years ago blocked Mcdonalds opening on my uni campus... Most of them would likely have left by the time it would have opened, and they could always have voted with their feet... Meanwhile a dodgy kebab shop opened instead serving less healthy food...

Anyone got a printer and some wallpaper paste? Reckon that no could easily be changed to a go ;)

Sure! Its public info related to the planning approval.

Just quote this to them... It proves 7m is already approved and is irrefutable. That in turn means the ONLY variable at play is emmisons from buildings. The new building uses circa 50% less carbon than the existing building (pre extension).

So she has no idea the airport already has approved an extension which enables 7m pax... Utterly useless...

It's in here "Currently the airport has approximately 4 million passengers per year and this scheme allows the airport to expand to 5 million by 2023 with the ultimate expansion to 7 million by 2030" https://t.co/ABOwpJeRB1

All those laptops burning electric all day...

I ask two simple questions to anyone objecting to the new terminal on environmental grounds. What is the scenario if this terminal is blocked? How is that better for the environment? As I see it there are only two scenarios if terminal is blocked and both are worse for the environment...

Even just a link road from Dawsons Corner to Drighlington would do wonders.

You can't really compare share prices per unit...

Sure is whilst nobody holds their spending to account! ;)

I did. They refused. It's a negligent use of public money and I can't believe nobody else questions how wyca can invest £42m of public money whilst nobody knows the real cost of the alternative option. I beleive the original report put the cost to connect the old terminal at £100m. Given the...