Future Infrastructure Developments

[HX3]

White Heather, I used [email protected] and got a reply the following day.

 

[HX3]

This is the response I received.

Thank you for your email about the planning application to expand Leeds Bradford Airport.


It is vital that our economy remains competitive, while ensuring we do all we can to tackle the climate emergency by reducing carbon emissions to meet our 2038 net-zero carbon target.



I understand that in May 2020, a planning application was submitted to Leeds City Council (LCC). Planning decisions rest solely with the relevant local Planning Authority; however, the West Yorkshire Combined Authority has previously submitted comments to LCC, recognising that there is a difficult trade-off between the economic benefit the airport brings, and the carbon it produces.



The application was approved by the City Plans Panel in February 2021. However, this was subject to a change and tightening up of certain conditions being discussed and agreed with the applicant, a Section 106 agreement and referral to the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government.



Part of the draft Section 106 agreement includes a package of around £4 million to improve public transport to the airport, including financial support for bus services, and a new spur road to the proposed railway station.



The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government has now put in place an order which prevents LCC from granting planning permission without special authorisation, and the Government has offered no indication of when a decision will be made.



I recognise that a thriving airport can greatly improve our region’s economic offer, and is projected to contribute £500m Gross Value Added by 2030, and support around 8,100 jobs, which is an increase of around 4,000 compared to 2019. I want to see the airport develop in a way that more clearly meets the needs of business and serves to drive inward investment and create jobs in the West Yorkshire economy.



However, I am absolutely not supportive of unconstrained growth that would harm our commitment to become a net zero carbon city region by 2038. Here in West Yorkshire we have a more ambitious target than central Government, and we have to meet those and exceed them if we can.



I also believe that there has to be a conversation about reducing the carbon impacts of air travel, and this requires a national, and international, approach. The Government recently published the Decarbonising Transport: A Better, Greener Britain paper that includes a number of commitments around the decarbonisation of the aviation industry including a commitment to consult on their Jet Zero strategy that will set out the steps to reach net zero aviation emissions by 2050. We are considering the implications of this for West Yorkshire. I will be following this closely to ensure that it encourages the aviation industry to reduce its emissions. LBA contributes about 1.4% of total UK aviation, so would represent a small part of the challenge.



I will also be taking a wider look about the fundamentals of transport in our region with a view to protecting our environment. I recognise that we need a significant shift from car to walking and cycling for short journeys, and this is at the centre of my Connectivity Plan, by integrating active travel into our day-to-day lives. Merely encouraging people to walk and cycle however isn’t enough, and I will be supporting the building of safe infrastructure to enable this. Longer term, I want to see a fully integrated mass transit system, that makes it easier to take quick journeys on public transport, bringing together walking and cycling, rail, bus, and a future mass transit system, that is fit for a decarbonising 21st century economy.



Once again thank you for contacting me about this issue.



Yours sincerely,



TB.

 

[LBAYORKIE]

Ive been trying to get hold of her since May. I will try again. My priority will be to ask her what she can do to speed up the decision process.

 

[CM.]

Thanks for that email @HX3 I’ve sent her an email regarding the terminal plans. Since she appeared on that program before becoming mayor I’ve not heard her mention anything about the terminal so will be interested to see what the reply will be.

 

[HX3]

I have posted the reply I got from her, but I think one of the moderators needs to approve before submission. The response though may give people some start points, or counter arguments to use and place in any emails they wish to send.

 

[White Heather]

Just what the hell is JR playing at! Has he approved the plans at SOU, and i believe there was another application at another airport?
I will email tracey brabin, whats her email?

He didn't approve SOU's new runway, but nor did he stop it. Unlike LBA, which had to submit to him under Green Belt rules, SOU didn't have to do that. However, GALBAs Southern relatives have requested a judicial review so the commencement of any work has been delayed until such time as the courts decide if the process of approval was carried out in a legally correct manner. A fate that probably awaits Leeds City Council and LBA even if the SoS eventually delves to the bottom of his in tray, reads the LBA planning application, finds a pen, and signs it off!

 

[Aviador]

I have posted the reply I got from her, but I think one of the moderators needs to approve before submission. The response though may give people some start points, or counter arguments to use and place in any emails they wish to send.

Your post was automatically flagged for moderation.

 

[dmrodgers]

Shows Tracy Brabin knows very little about the airport when the first line f her reply to HX3 says, to quote her words, "Thank you for your email about the planning application to expand Leeds Bradford Airport". This application is not about expansion as we already have this to 7m passengers by extending the old terminal but to build a new carbon neutral terminal to replace an existing terminal that is not fit for use.

 

[White Heather]

Shows Tracy Brabin knows very little about the airport when the first line f her reply to HX3 says, to quote her words, "Thank you for your email about the planning application to expand Leeds Bradford Airport". This application is not about expansion as we already have this to 7m passengers by extending the old terminal but to build a new carbon neutral terminal to replace an existing terminal that is not fit for use.

She probably learned all she knows about LBA from the 5 Leeds Labour MPs!

 

[CM.]

The email I sent claimed it should it should take 15 working days to receive a reply. That’s if I get a response.

I’ve read the above response she gave to @HX3 and honestly she seems so clueless about it. Calls it expansion and then says it’s not about expansion, which one is it? She seems to be more against it by that response and I quite regret voting her, I’ll remember that for the next voting.

 

[Sherburnflyer92]

She probably learned all she knows about LBA from the 5 Leeds Labour MPs!

And the airports MP’s a very strong word which shouldn’t ever be bounded about on the internet. Honestly all Leeds MPs a a useless waste of space. Cannot wait for the airport to be represented by a Tory who understands the industry and airport worth to the economy.

 

[LBAYORKIE]

Shows Tracy Brabin knows very little about the airport when the first line f her reply to HX3 says, to quote her words, "Thank you for your email about the planning application to expand Leeds Bradford Airport". This application is not about expansion as we already have this to 7m passengers by extending the old terminal but to build a new carbon neutral terminal to replace an existing terminal that is not fit for use.

As I understood it the terminal extension was to accommodate a maximum of 5m passengers so anything more than that may not be realistic. The opposition know this and thats why they see preventing the new terminal being built as the key to stopping 'expansion. Theres also the matter of the airports agreement to consult with the council as they approach 5m, which some see as an opportunity for LCCs planning committe to cap throughput at 5m.

 

[White Heather]

As I understood it the terminal extension was to accommodate a maximum of 5m passengers so anything more than that may not be realistic. The opposition know this and thats why they see preventing the new terminal being built as the key to stopping 'expansion. Theres also the matter of the airports agreement to consult with the council as they approach 5m, which some see as an opportunity for LCCs planning committe to cap throughput at 5m.

The consultation with the Council was more to do with measures similar to Section 106 requirements such as road scheme contributions, public transport and road access etc. They can't impose a passenger limit unless the airport submit a further planning application. They just did that with the new terminal, but LCC didn't impose a cap, so why would the opposition think they might do at 5m should the airport have to continue with the previously binned extension scheme?

As things stand, LBA could have passenger throughput of whatever they could cope with. The previous scheme mentions 5m then on to 7m with further consultation as you say, but it doesn't say (as far as I am aware) that they have to submit a further planning application. Ultimately the limit is whatever can be accommodated through the terminal safely and efficiently. If we had more non based flights arriving at quieter times such as between 0930 and 1230 or 1700 to 2100, then with the extension they could probably fit more than 5m passengers over year. But sadly that is unlikely. Even so, LBA are adamant that the previous scheme did enable eventual growth to 7m. But, it's obvious that it would be far more difficult in a perfect world, and we most definitely don't have that.

It's worth remembering that with the previous extension, the in-bound issues would be largely resolved and phase 2 was to re-work the existing terminal to improve departures. A difficult thing to do whilst continuing to operate, but vital to generate more space and a more logical layout , whilst of course, it would never be carbon neutral so would severely hamper LBAs ability to meet its CO2 targets.

As far as GALBA are concerned, it seems to me that all they want to do is use any tactic they can to slow down development one way or another, or stop it altogether, irrespective of the damage to our economy or the loss of job opportunities. The climate issues reported every day are just manna from heaven for them and a useful tool to assist them in getting their selfish way.

 

[LBAYORKIE]

Environmental issues are important but GALBAs arguments do not have any environmental merit. Restricting growth at LBA will just result in growth at competitor airports so the airborne pollution just transfers elsewhere and to that must be added pollution from people driving there! So whilst what they propose benefits the local environment overall theres an increase in pollution. How can they justify this? The truth is GALBA have a NIMBY agenda and are not interested in the wider environment.

 

[Len Fish]

They will probably want a cycle lane airside next so people don’t use buses and use the “cleaner” way of getting to your aircraft.

The six seater crew bicycle would be quite a sight!

 

[CM.]

Its not am ambitious statement, its what an airport in Leeds should be handling, if luton and Edinburgh are at around 13 to 15million then leeds, west yorkshire and the east of the pennines in general could easily have an airport of that vol of pax, the main issue would then be the location of LBA, so i guess what im saying is that a well located airport in the leeds zone would easily attract 15million but the current location of LBA yes probably around 10million max
Look at BRS, 10million a year and their city is much smaller with a much smaller population bith city and region.

But Edinburgh and Luton are bigger airports. Plus they’re each in capital cities.

whilst I agree that we should have more from Leeds we have to remember that Leeds isn’t the biggest airport out there you can only get a certain amount in. Even with the new terminal it’s not going to go past 10 million as I’ve read it’s about 7 million a year. The current terminal could definitely not handle 10 million and even if it did I don’t think It would reach beyond 10 million for along time due to the impact of the pandemic.

There are also other factors to consider whilst we still use the old terminal:

• Manchester airport is not that far away and is bigger and has more choice of flights
• Transport to LBA is shite. The only public transport there is now is buses and they’re not that big either.
• Costs- Sometimes it’s cheaper to fly from other UK airports rather than LBA

With regards to Bristol there lots of airports nearby such as Cardiff, Exeter, Newquay, Bournemouth ect which are small and don’t have much options of flights whereas BRS does so I’m sure there will be people from across Wales and the South of England that use it as many of their local airports don’t have much choices of places to travel.

 

[Sherburnflyer92]

Its not am ambitious statement, its what an airport in Leeds should be handling, if luton and Edinburgh are at around 13 to 15million then leeds, west yorkshire and the east of the pennines in general could easily have an airport of that vol of pax, the main issue would then be the location of LBA, so i guess what im saying is that a well located airport in the leeds zone would easily attract 15million but the current location of LBA yes probably around 10million max
Look at BRS, 10million a year and their city is much smaller with a much smaller population bith city and region.

Edinburgh is a capital city so by rights will be busy. It not only offers multiple different business links (because of the nature of any capital city) to overseas, domestic links both within the UK and domestically in Scotland (because of limited nature of how you can get around Scotland due to the many different Islands) but also inbound tourism from USA and Canada (as well as from others) is big because of the attraction to go to Edinburgh. That is why that handles 15 million.

Luton is an overflow London airport but in its own right pulls in on its catchment area. Cambridge and Oxford and the big science/tech areas of the UK are within reach of Luton (and Stansted), it pulls from the North London catchment area as well as acting as an overflow for the Birmingham airport. Don't let it be mistaken the London market is very much a licence to print money due to the wealth of the catchment area and the want/need to visit London to do business but also for inbound tourism. It also has many visitors visiting family and friends too.

Bristol only has Birmingham within its area and even then I wouldn't say it's all that close. Cardiff offers an alternative to BRS but that's for TUI. Bristol has the whole of the Devon and Cornwall area to it's self and some of the south coast. Probably also act's as an overflow for some customers who are half way on the M4 where it really makes no difference to travel to London Heathrow/Gatwick or Bristol. Whilst there are some airports within the catchment area they are just little airports. TUI and Ryanair make EXT/BOH work respectively but they never really expand those operations.

What I'm getting at is you cannot say it should be delivering this many passengers without situational awareness. We may have a rich catchment area and one with a fair chunk of the population living it, however for some people who live in Huddersfield/Halifax, it's fair easier to drive to the M62 to go towards Manchester then it is to drive with the hassle of getting to LBA. We have Doncaster, East Midlands, Newcastle and Manchester all pulling from the same catchment area with different extents (EMA is always a very last option for me but I'll always look). Without the inbound drive to visit Yorkshire and the economic power that comes from been a capital city airport of been one of several airports feeding a capital city unfortunately your very ambitious 15 mppa is a pipe dream. Also to what extent would 15mppa out of LBA have on MAN? And what you doing about the Runaway, weather etc.

This is in comparison to London market/LTN and Edinburgh who can easily pull 15-16 mppa due to reasons I've already stated above. We can dream of that but it will never happen and to ignore the reasons behind why it won't happen is silly. A realistic 6-7mppa will do nicely.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Sherburnflyer92 makes some valid points about the variables that affect airport performance.

Edinburgh is mentioned and the point is made about it being a capital city airport. That is not always a bonus: look at CWL for example that at 1.6 mppa in 2019 hadn't regained its pre-late 'noughties' recession high of 2.1 mppa in 2007. Even if it had its capital city airport status hasn't helped it to outperform similar non-capital city airports. It's also loss-making and has been since the Welsh Government bought it in 2013 and indeed before that.

In 2019 EDI handled 14.74 million passengers out of which 3.73 million travelled to/from London airports (LHR, LGW, STN, LTN and LCY). As a city Edinburgh is about the same size as Bristol and the latter's airport handled only two million fewer passengers than EDI in 2019 if London passengers are discounted. BRS has no London route as it's too close to the capital.

I still believe that LBA should be doing at least as well as BRS passenger-wise, given the size and make-up of the former's catchment, but it's difficult to compare airport performance even those with as many similarities as LBA and BRS because of those variables. Furthermore, White Heather alluded to historical political baggage with LBA, about which LBA followers would know far more than I do.

All stats courtesy of the CAA.

 

[HX3]

I think the problem for LBA is changing years of ingrained bias towards Manchester, whether that be from local travel agents with a window full of MAN offers and a token LBA offering. The local papers which have some issues saying anything positive or accurate; BBC Look North where many feel there is a bias toward South Yorkshire - DSA generally features favourable news items, again LBA not so much. Many people in the past may have also suffered due to fog, but as we know, whilst it is an issue, it impacts relatively few flights.

So, combined there is historic and ongoing poor publicity, which previous council groups have done little to allay. Companies like Jet2 have helped to change the mind set of many and driven a loyalty to LBA. But then, non operational escalators, excessive bussing and waiting for domestic flights to clear, then entering an overcrowded arrivals area don’t help the cause.

In my opinion, LBA themselves need to drive change and splash more cash on local tv, advertising, counter arguing papers etc. There is too much sitting back in silence. Look at LPL reaching out to Sun Express and putting it in the public domain - it shows they are pushing for their local customer base. LBA need to share more of what they are doing - as long as not contract sensitive of course.

I’m of the opinion that if the airport help themselves more and the terminal materialises, then new routes will come and we can retain more of our passenger leakage to other airports. Yorkshire as a region under sells its self and our airport I feel does the same, we should be more proud of what we have to offer and have a bit more Yorkshire grit in driving change. Just my thoughts

 

[LBAYORKIE]

I think the problem for LBA is changing years of ingrained bias towards Manchester, whether that be from local travel agents with a window full of MAN offers and a token LBA offering. The local papers which have some issues saying anything positive or accurate; BBC Look North where many feel there is a bias toward South Yorkshire - DSA generally features favourable news items, again LBA not so much. Many people in the past may have also suffered due to fog, but as we know, whilst it is an issue, it impacts relatively few flights.

So, combined there is historic and ongoing poor publicity, which previous council groups have done little to allay. Companies like Jet2 have helped to change the mind set of many and driven a loyalty to LBA. But then, non operational escalators, excessive bussing and waiting for domestic flights to clear, then entering an overcrowded arrivals area don’t help the cause.

In my opinion, LBA themselves need to drive change and splash more cash on local tv, advertising, counter arguing papers etc. There is too much sitting back in silence. Look at LPL reaching out to Sun Express and putting it in the public domain - it shows they are pushing for their local customer base. LBA need to share more of what they are doing - as long as not contract sensitive of course.

I’m of the opinion that if the airport help themselves more and the terminal materialises, then new routes will come and we can retain more of our passenger leakage to other airports. Yorkshire as a region under sells its self and our airport I feel does the same, we should be more proud of what we have to offer and have a bit more Yorkshire grit in driving change. Just my thoughts

I agree 100%