Future Infrastructure Developments

[LBAYORKIE]

So, anyone see Look North tonight? Anyone spotted that they have changed their tune? Having apparently opposed LBA development throughout the planning process, suddenly they are bemoaning the loss of a significant new infrastructure project.

Tonight, there was a decent length interview with LBA CEO Vincent Hodder. He came across well. He stated quite clearly that the 2019 planning approval enabled 7m pax per year.

He also stated that in the future there would be more flights operating during 2300 and 0700 because the current quota count does not apply to the latest generation of quieter jets, so a 737 MAX or A321NEO won't be counted.

He came across as very determined and had a 'fighting back' feel to him. It felt to me that he's sick if GALBA, MPs and Government and is now moving things forward as quickly as possible. He stated that the extension (and other changes) will deliver 80% if the improvements included in the new build.and provide a greatly enhanced passenger experience throughout the terminal. So it's clear they are not stopping with the extension and will be reconfiguring the existing terminal space as a future phase.

Well worth watching if you can. Ironic though that in his office he had a large model of an Eastern Jetstream 41 on the day it appears they have pulled the plug on LBA ops.

Or not again as it seems Newquay back on sale.

I need a drink!

It was on at lunch time too. Shame he didn't emphasise the loss to regional travellers and local economy of the airport not proceeding with the new terminal. It was a good opportunity to score points against GALBA.

 

[White Heather]

It was on at lunch time too. Shame he didn't emphasise the loss to regional travellers and local economy of the airport not proceeding with the new terminal. It was a good opportunity to score points against GALBA.

Perhaps he did. It was clearly edited. Auntie Beeb wouldn't want to upset GALBA!

 

[JRP]

I think this is brilliant he has come out and said unlimited flights in the night I can’t wait for it to happen just to see the stupid useless 5 labour MP’s faces, ho ho ho Christmas has come early, it just show how out of touch the MP’s are, instead of getting true facts they listen to idiots like Foden, well done to GALBA for letting us expand to 7 million passengers a year

 

[LBAYORKIE]

I think GALBA are pinning their hopes on persuading the planning panel to impose such onerous s106 conditions to the increase to 7m that the airport wont agree to them. We shall see.

 

[White Heather]

I think GALBA are pinning their hopes on persuading the planning panel to impose such onerous s106 conditions to the increase to 7m that the airport wont agree to them. We shall see.

Why would they? The Plans Panel dont set the S106 requirements. It's delegated to the Planning Officer who has supported the airport throughout and remember also that the Council were supporting LBA at the proposed Public inquiry and, it remains Leeds City Council's official policy to support the development of the airport.

 

[LBAYORKIE]

I dont think they would either but lm assuming that's what the Labour MPs and GALBA are hoping. I know I may come across as negative at times but after a lifetime of involvement with the airport I know if it can go wrong it will and assumptions cannot becrelied upon.

 

[White Heather]

I dont think they would either but lm assuming that's what the Labour MPs and GALBA are hoping. I know I may come across as negative at times but after a lifetime of involvement with the airport I know if it can go wrong it will and assumptions cannot becrelied upon.

I am also fairly sure that there are rules that prevent councils from imposing ridiculous S106 requirements deliberately to prevent a business from expanding in accordance with a planning approval.
That said, like you, I have long since learned to expect nothing at LBA until it's actually done

 

[oldendays]

Here's to spades in the soil.

 

[Statto]

I am also fairly sure that there are rules that prevent councils from imposing ridiculous S106 requirements deliberately to prevent a business from expanding in accordance with a planning approval.
That said, like you, I have long since learned to expect nothing at LBA until it's actually done

A S106 is a set of legal obligations that attaches to a planning permission, so yes, a council can't just magic one up out of thin air. In the case of LBA, the planning permission for the 2019 eastern extension has been implemented and the S106 has been signed, so that's done and dusted. It doesn't matter that the above ground building work hasn't started. The airport worked on the drainage and some ground prep works so in the eyes of the law, that's the same as starting the work and implementing the planning permission. This is confirmed on the council's planning portal.

And because the planning application for the new terminal has been withdrawn, there isn't a live planning application to attach any new conditions to.

So there won't be an opportunity for any new S106 conditions until if / when the airport submits a new planning application for something.

 

[LBAYORKIE]

A S106 is a set of legal obligations that attaches to a planning permission, so yes, a council can't just magic one up out of thin air. In the case of LBA, the planning permission for the 2019 eastern extension has been implemented and the S106 has been signed, so that's done and dusted. It doesn't matter that the above ground building work hasn't started. The airport worked on the drainage and some ground prep works so in the eyes of the law, that's the same as starting the work and implementing the planning permission. This is confirmed on the council's planning portal.

And because the planning application for the new terminal has been withdrawn, there isn't a live planning application to attach any new conditions to.

So there won't be an opportunity for any new S106 conditions until if / when the airport submits a new planning application for something.

What about the clause in the planning permission that requires a review if S106's 'when approaching 5m?'

 

[Statto]

It just says that if the airport needs to do anything eIse that requires express planning permission to help them get over 5M, they need to apply for planning permission in good time. But of course, they don't need to do anything else. I think I've posted the wording of that before if you look back in this thread somewhere.

 

[LBAYORKIE]

You probably have, but its good to hear it again.

 

[Statto]

Future Infrastructure Developments

Just another quick observation ive made about people of Yorkshire thinking DSA should be the airport of choice (LOL) at present they only have 2 airlines operating from there? TUI & WIZZ (a weekly BOJ by BH also) but that is it. No dig at DSA, but LBA still has a healthy choice of airlines...

forums4airports.com

 

[Len Fish]

Section 106 is a device to allow planning permission to be given for a project that would not otherwise be approved. In LBA’s case the Council, although acknowledging that currently such things as road access around the airport are adequate for the current numbers of passengers, the Section 106 gives the Council the ability to impose further access requirements when passenger numbers increase and more importantly allows them to require LBA to make a financial contribution to any works outside of the airport’s boundaries. As others have said, given the Council’s support for LBA the financial contribution required is likely to be reasonable and no doubt will have been factored into LBA’s future plans.

 

[White Heather]

The key to hitting 7m per year without having to submit another planning application will be what they do within the old terminal area to generate more seating, more gates, more facilities etc. That's the area that is restricted once the baggage reclaim area has been provided in the extension.

Obviously the extension also provides more departure space on the upper floor but as I said yesterday, the eventual relocation of the security screening area into what is now the general area occupied by baggage reclaim, would provide an opportunity to open up space for an enlarged Check In Hall A, something that is badly needed. This would also provide a more logical way around the building for those using Check in A (still leaving the Jet2 hall up the wrong end sadly).

If they can hit 7m per year without any further planning applications, then beyond that they might be able to make further changes requiring planning consent to improve layout further although of course if GALBA/son of GALBA think they would increase passenger numbers and flights further, there is sure to be resistance.

Vince Hodder said yesterday that the current plans enabled 7m per year if they develop the terminal with imagination. To me that suggested that they may go further than building just the extension now, and crack straight in with the changes to the old building straight after. After all, they had funding for £150m. He said this scheme is 'less than half the price', so less than £75m. Well, the extension scheme in isolation was around £25m from memory, so there should be scope to get the other changes done, and improve the walkway.

One thing is for sure, it's going to be interesting to see what they do and how quickly.

 

[LBAYORKIE]

The key to hitting 7m per year without having to submit another planning application will be what they do within the old terminal area to generate more seating, more gates, more facilities etc. That's the area that is restricted once the baggage reclaim area has been provided in the extension.

Obviously the extension also provides more departure space on the upper floor but as I said yesterday, the eventual relocation of the security screening area into what is now the general area occupied by baggage reclaim, would provide an opportunity to open up space for an enlarged Check In Hall A, something that is badly needed. This would also provide a more logical way around the building for those using Check in A (still leaving the Jet2 hall up the wrong end sadly).

If they can hit 7m per year without any further planning applications, then beyond that they might be able to make further changes requiring planning consent to improve layout further although of course if GALBA/son of GALBA think they would increase passenger numbers and flights further, there is sure to be resistance.

Vince Hodder said yesterday that the current plans enabled 7m per year if they develop the terminal with imagination. To me that suggested that they may go further than building just the extension now, and crack straight in with the changes to the old building straight after. After all, they had funding for £150m. He said this scheme is 'less than half the price', so less than £75m. Well, the extension scheme in isolation was around £25m from memory, so there should be scope to get the other changes done, and improve the walkway.

One thing is for sure, it's going to be interesting to see what they do and how quickly.

The environmental picture could be much different by the time any future planning application is submitted. Aircraft are becoming quieter and less polluting all the time so in five years time public opposition to the airport and support for GALBA could be a thing of the past.

 

[White Heather]

The environmental picture could be much different by the time any future planning application is submitted. Aircraft are becoming quieter and less polluting all the time so in five years time public opposition to the airport and support for GALBA could be a thing of the past.

But there will still be the LBA haters out there. Built in the wrong place, hard to get to, Doncaster should be Yorkshire's Airport cos it's got a long runway, LBA has crap weather with too many diverts etc. are all claims that won't go away.

 

[paully]

True the haters will never give up. However the paucity of their argument is laid wide open..Even before Covid hardly any serious Air Passenger Operator was interested in DSA, with or without its long runway. There is no sign of that situation changing anytime soon.

 

[HX3]

I’m feeling fairly positive now the decision has been made and one thing about the Aussies is they don’t take crap. Mr Hodder was subtle, but very clear with his message that they won’t be messing around, whether it be night time movements or the extension. Bring it on, I can’t wait to see some smugness wiped off the faces of those MP’s and GALBA. I also think once there is some movement and things start to get built, we will see new routes, operators and expansion by current carriers

 

[JRP]

We should have a whip round for GALBA and Foden so we can get them a massive slice of humble pie and put it right outside the new extension