Future Infrastructure Developments

[LBA4EVER]

I am sure AMP knew all along it was going to be an uphill struggle. Building anything new at an airport is a struggle in the UK.

Building anything full stop in this country esp leeds is a struggle!!

 

[lbaspotter]

This morning the chair of the "Northern Powerhouse all Party Parliamentary Group" & Conservative MP (For Thirsk and Malton), Kevin Hollinrake made the case in Parliament as to why the new terminal at Leeds Bradford Airport is essential to West Yorkshire's economy.

View Transport Minister, Robert Courts reply.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1387697111089786882

 

[Statto]

Building anything full stop in this country esp leeds is a struggle!!

You should take a walk around the centre of Leeds. Loads going on at the moment

 

[LBA787]

Building anything full stop in this country esp leeds is a struggle!!

Is it possible AMP could build a new 3000 meter long straight cycle lane in south east Leeds, this new cycle Lane would also be strong enough for a fully laden A380 and would need a couple of ancillary buildings close by for cyclists to rest in.

 

[LBA787]

You should take a walk around the centre of Leeds. Loads going on at the moment

Which is brilliant but also exactly why improved transport connectivity is essential.

Leeds as much as I love it Is horrendous to commute around compared to other cities of a similar size in the UK and around the world.

 

[White Heather]

Perhaps LBA should redesignate it's runway as a cycle super highway then extend it both ends. LCC probably won't notice - they will be just overjoyed to have a fantastic new cycle highway at no cost.

 

[Aviador]

Campaigners hit out at 'misleading' claims over Leeds Bradford Airport plans

CAMPAIGNERS fighting to stop the expansion of Leeds Bradford Airport have hit out over what they say are “misleading claims” about the plan.

www.wharfedaleobserver.co.uk

Antk airport campaigners complain about mis information

In a further response to Mr Wheatpeas on the Wharfedale Observer I have asked him to respond to my previous post there, but he will no doubt choose to ignore it in his selective reading GALBA and their affiliates seem to have.

"For other members of the public following this debate. "Barry Wheatpeas" claimed he has no affiliation with GALBA or ER and yet he claimed GALBA had raised sufficient funds to mount a legal battle against LBA before GALBA had even announced this publicly.​

​

In any case Barry, how about responding to the FACTS I mentioned in my previous comment?​

​

Barry Wheatpeas / GALBA have made a big song and dance about so called "EXPANSION" and some people agree and object on the **understanding** that cancelling the new terminal proposal means no more flights when it doesn't. It simply means a completely new terminal can't be built but previous plans can continue to reach the same expansion GALBA claim will be stopped. You / they are clearly ill-informed if you / they think pre-planned and authorised growth can be stopped.​

​

As I said in my earlier post, until LBA is told otherwise regarding the building of a replacement terminal LBA has the authority to pursue a previously approved plan to extend the current terminal building. The current terminal building has regularly handled over 500,000 a month (6 million a year annual capacity) and the approved extension would add further capacity, The existing permissions do not include any legal restrictions on passenger throughput at the airport.​

​

On commencement of the proposed replacement terminal, the previous plans become void. If the plans were to go to a public enquiry the airport could still decide to pursue the old plans even in the event of a rejection result at a public enquiry.​

​

It's ridiculous, borderline pathetic to try to stop the new proposals which will allow the same number of passengers through a greener more efficient terminal building. Even the greenbelt argument doesn't stack up as the new terminal would sit on what is currently 1m think concrete used for aircraft parking.​

​

FACTS you cannot deny and will chose to ignore in your vociferous tirade against the airport.​

​

As I also said in my previous submission here, I am local to LBA and live within the Wharfedale Observer catchment area. You have said previously you reside on the other side of the Pennines. Another agenda perhaps?"​

As Mr Wheatpeas has made it clear, he also frequents this public forum, so for his convenience I will add some renders of the developments the airport started and can finish if it so chooses to, thus enabling 7mppa.

• Terminal extension to the East of the current terminal with lower level used for arrivals and upper level used to extend the current departure facility.

• In addition to the above, as I mentioned previously, the airport also has permission to make the present semi-temporary structure housing B-Hall check-in into a more permanent structure.

 

[LBA4EVER]

You should take a walk around the centre of Leeds. Loads going on at the moment

Yes leeds cc is in a league of its own regards new development, the cc will literally double in size over the next five years with numerous skyscrapers and the like going up! Thing is though its alright having this modern ever expanding city centre but if you cant get in and out of it because of traffic jams and poor transport infrastructure ie no supertram and having to fly into MAN then it does not sell the place well. But yes its fantastic how leeds cc is growing, both leeds and manchester seem to be the UKs fastest growing cities atm

 

[CM.]

When getting into a discussion with those that oppose the plans. Sometimes they don’t think of the full picture such as more ground pollution as people will travel by car to other airports. I respect everybody’s views on the plans (Evan if it’s against) but sometimes they come out with nonsense awnsers.

 

[Len Fish]

You should take a walk around the centre of Leeds. Loads going on at the moment

Indeed there is including even more super highway cycle lanes that won’t be used. There’s traffic jam, pollution causing road works everywhere as part of the Connecting Leeds programme which seems nothing more than an attempt to discourage even more the use of private motor vehicles without the mass transit system Leeds so desperately needs to make that a reality.
Latest bright idea is all buses in West Yorkshire now show “line” on their destination blinds e.g, “White Rose” Line, “Heckmondwike” Line. It just doesn’t cut it.

 

[Mick_LUFC]

When getting into a discussion with those that oppose the plans. Sometimes they don’t think of the full picture such as more ground pollution as people will travel by car to other airports. I respect everybody’s views on the plans (Evan if it’s against) but sometimes they come out with nonsense awnsers.

All we ever hear about these days is CO2 emissions.

Now this would be stretching my GCSE Maths a bit but how about using CO2 emissions to add positively for the new terminal to go ahead.

Basically either estimate or ask LBA Environment Officer for info on C02 emissions from energy (Gas & Electricity) usage at LBA, prior to Covid. These may be on the bills. I think they were when I worked there.

Then if someone could create a table with Years 1 to 10 or 15/20 with the current CO2 emissions per year then compare it to any info from the plans that could be obtained.

So basically we can prove that by rejecting the plans it will actually be worse for the environment than approving the planned energy efficient terminal.

I hope this makes sense. Its been a long day!

 

[LBAYORKIE]

There is no environmental impact. If Leeds can't offer the flights people want they will just fly from other airports, so the environmental impact is the same, just in a different location.

 

[LBAYORKIE]

When getting into a discussion with those that oppose the plans. Sometimes they don’t think of the full picture such as more ground pollution as people will travel by car to other airports. I respect everybody’s views on the plans (Evan if it’s against) but sometimes they come out with nonsense awnsers.

Which facebook group is this please?

 

[CM.]

Which Facebook group is this please?

It’s on Twitter. The LBA support group put a tweet on there responding to someone and then they came out with the usual stuff. And of course ‘GALBA’ got into the discussion with their garbage.

 

[LBAYORKIE]

Oh. I dont do twitter, if I did I would have chipped in giving you support.

 

[CM.]

All we ever hear about these days is CO2 emissions.

Now this would be stretching my GCSE Maths a bit but how about using CO2 emissions to add positively for the new terminal to go ahead.

Basically either estimate or ask LBA Environment Officer for info on C02 emissions from energy (Gas & Electricity) usage at LBA, prior to Covid. These may be on the bills. I think they were when I worked there.

Then if someone could create a table with Years 1 to 10 or 15/20 with the current CO2 emissions per year then compare it to any info from the plans that could be obtained.

So basically we can prove that by rejecting the plans it will actually be worse for the environment than approving the planned energy efficient terminal.

I hope this makes sense. Its been a long day!

Completely agree here, regarding the new terminal all I hear from those Against is emissions more aircraft. It’s craziness that something that is better for our environment is causing so much negativity and people will do anything just to stop it.

 

[lbaspotter]

If your not following us on twitter yet, why not? As you'll have missed some of this information been posted.

The Yorkshire Post yesterday revealed on twitter some details of polling they recently done regards the new Terminal development at LBA. They then got a few replies from Henri Murison at the Northern Powerhouse Partnership.

First up is tweet from Yorkshire Post business editor Mark Casci

https://twitter.com/x/status/1388137794455937024

Following reply from Henri Murison at Northern Powerhouse Partnership.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1388145220211023877

And here another reply to a question asked

https://twitter.com/x/status/1388424929654329344

 

[CM.]

This is great news to hear that more people support the plans. But of course looking in the comment area ‘Galba’ and their league are out in full force questioning the poll. But good news nonetheless.

 

[Aviador]

I wasn't aware of the poll so I imagine there will be many other supporters who also weren't.

I'm sure GALBA didn't miss the chance to express their views on the poll. Lets not forget GALBA is backed by members of Leeds University who have publicly and openly said they support "civil disobedience" to further their cause. I won't name them here but there is a Reuters news article feature this which is easily locatable on Google.

 

[CM.]

I wasn’t aware of this poll either until they mentioned it, buts it’s good to know it has more support than opposition.