Future Infrastructure Developments

[LBA4EVER]

Most UK airports were not above 7 mppa pre-pandemic.

This is the 12-monthly rolling passenger totals for UK airports for February 2020, the last month before the pandemic effects began to be felt.

https://www.caa.co.uk/uploadedFiles/CAA/Content/Standard_Content/Data_and_analysis/Datasets/Airport_stats/Airport_data_2020_02/Table_01_Size_of_UK_Airports.pdf

many uk airports, not most uk airports, my error soz . Something tells me this year that only Heathrow, manchester and possibly gatwick and stansted will carry more than 7 million pax

 

[Sherburnflyer92]

Another article on line by Richard Beecham once again highlighting the opposition. Good to see that this open letter, and a statement by GALBAs agitator in chief are still telling the same lies, totally ignoring the fact they have been disproved within the Planning officer report and by the independent consultants brought in by the Council to verify (or disprove) LBAs claims.

These people are just impossible.

They just want their argument heard. You cannot disprove it, or come to a common sense agreement. People are going "we don't want people travelling to Manchester" - well shut the .... up and accept we need a decent terminal at the airport. They really are the most stupidest of stupid people.

 

[LBAYORKIE]

The council have changed the goalposts for tomorrows zoom.

 

[LBAYORKIE]

Not happy!

 

[White Heather]

In what way?

 

[airforced]

The council have changed the goalposts for tomorrows zoom.

Please explain further LBAYORKIE.

 

[LBAYORKIE]

Let me calm down a bit or PM me.

 

[leedslad]

Jumping ahead a little, but does anyone know...

IF councillors vote in favour tomorrow, and then govt approves, is there any room for appeal/challenge or is that final?

Feel like tomorrow could just be first step of many

 

[Hendi]

So it all boils down to tomorrow for lba what are we thinking? Approval or rejected?
The planning officers recommendation gives a little hope sorry to sound negative but my gut feeling is they will reject it. What does everybody else think

 

[LBAYORKIE]

The council have decided to let all 28 (or so) objectors speak tomorrow. 2 minutes each.

 

[White Heather]

God that will be boring! The same stuff, 28 times over. They seem to have a script.

My forecast tomorrow would be rejection if only because I have seen LCC do this before. I would hope an appeal then with a win for LBA and LCC picking up the bill.

My one hope is that they have decided to let all 28 speak against because it's a process requirement to avoid a legal challenge. The planning officer has ensured all the way through that the opposition had no grounds to challenge any approval on legal grounds due to the correct process not being followed. It was the Chairman who restricted it to 12 minutes in total for each side, but perhaps they have been told that doing that is again opening the door to a challenge.

 

[LBAYORKIE]

I dont see how its going to be better. 28 voices against the airport is a lot and its not how the process was sold to us.

 

[LBA4EVER]

The council have decided to let all 28 (or so) objectors speak tomorrow. 2 minutes each.

also if 28 objectors speak for 2mins each thats 56mins so we the ones for the plans should get that time too!

 

[LBAYORKIE]

I have been given 8 minutes. Not happy about that either. I had prepared 2 minutes. Short notice to find another 6 minutes

 

[LBA4EVER]

I have been given 8 minutes. Not happy about that either. I had prepared 2 minutes. Short notice to find another 6 minutes

what i would suggest is bullet point notes then from each point you can put sentences together, keeps it all in order too, break it down into sections

 

[LBAYORKIE]

Im useless at doing that, its too easy to mix one topic into another (conflate) I will script the whole thing. Its my own views anyway so im just going to get on with it and keep fingers crossed.

 

[LBA4EVER]

Im useless at doing that, its too easy to mix one topic into another (conflate) I will script the whole thing. Its my own views anyway so im just going to get on with it and keep fingers crossed.

ok well we are behind you 100% and im sure if you require any info the members on here will provide you with that.

 

[White Heather]

what i would suggest is bullet point notes then from each point you can put sentences together, keeps it all in order too, break it down into sections

There is loads to say so 8 minutes is good. T'other lot only get 2 minutes each trying to avoid repeating what the last one said. Now you have time to cover most key areas.

Thoughts......

1. The need to replace an inadequate terminal as the current one presents a very poor image if the city.

2. The fact the new one is CO2 neutral.

3. The fact that even IF the airport ever reaches 7m pax, which isn't guaranteed, it will be well within the CO2 budget set by Government for LBA.

4. That it's got Government to control airport emissions, not the Council to ensure a level playing field at all airports.

5. Rejection will lead to increased flights at other airports, with increased CO2 due to more traffic driving to those other airports.

6. Rejection is throwing a huge amount of GDP down the drain just when the city and region need it most.

7. Approval will generate construction jobs over the next 2 to 3 years AND protect existing aviation and airport linked jobs, which otherwise are at risk.

8. Approval will enable LBA to handle larger, more modern, quieter and less polluting aircraft, enabling more passengers on the same number of aircraft.

9. Aviation is already developing low emission engine technology ,such as hydrogen, due in the air within a few years of LBAs target for 7m pax p.a

10. If rejected, nothing to stop LBA building the already approved and started cheap and cheerful terminal extension which is not carbon neutral and increasing passengers anyway. Then we get more CO2, not less.

11. GALBA do not speak for the majority. Nor do the MPs and opposed Councillors. As they will find out at the next elections hopefully.

12. Over 1200 wrote in support, not an organised objection done by GALBA and ER, just local people. Supporting their airport. Another 1650 signed our ongoing petition. 75% in favour in the Wharfedale Observer poll. Over 90% in favour in our Facebook poll.

13. Rejection will set this city and region back decades. An airport enables a city to compete. Rejection will seriously damage the economy and cost jobs. Fact!

14. The airport serves the entire region, not just Leeds. Rejection will negatively impact ion the entire region.

Just ideas. I am sure you will think of something.

Good luck and take your blood pressure pills beforehand, as you will surly need it listening to the opposition rabbiting on!!

 

[LBA4EVER]

Like i mentioned and what you have done WH, bullet point notes keeps it in order.
one more point to mention is that the likes of GALBA and even some councilors just think about their own self interest rather than others!

 

[scottrhino]

This almost reminds me of the Irish EU vote when it was sent back enough times so we win!!

Saying that I’d rather have 8 minutes than 2. At my children’s parents evening you get 5 minutes a time and believe me you cannot our a lot across in that time.

Although the pro have less numbers we make up with in more time. If only I wasn’t working I’d have happily contributed with the facts.

Very much like the Brexit vote, those who wanted out will not be around to see it’s impact on the younger generation and that is true here. 28 people equals too many retired people not seeing the bigger picture.

Fingers crossed it gets passed and the extra time allowed is lip service only.