Airport seeks legal clarification on night flying

[Aviador]

Are those their Halloween outfits?

Yes and I'm pretty sure they're not green!

 

[Bigman]

Dare I even mention what has pinged up on a YEP news feed

 

[LBAYORKIE]

Dare I even mention what has pinged up on a YEP news feed

https://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/news/transport/leeds-bradford-airport-accused-of-breaking-night-time-flight-quota-by-nearly-500-flights-this-summer-4391415

 

[lbaspotter]

By all accounts Leeds City Council decision on whether or not to grant the airport the certificates they’ve requested has also been delayed until November 22.

 

[LBAYORKIE]

By all accounts Leeds City Council decision on whether or not to grant the airport the certificates they’ve requested has also been delayed until November 22.

No surprise.

 

[paully]

I see the loonies have moved to central Leeds for the time being.

AAh the great unwashed..Just look at them.Not exactly the brightest stars in the sky are they??????

By all accounts Leeds City Council decision on whether or not to grant the airport the certificates they’ve requested has also been delayed until November 22.

Which translated means.... The LBA request is correct, as per their legal advice..Damn them..How dare they ask for what is theirs.We need time to find a way to thwart what the law requires.....

 

[JRP]

By all accounts Leeds City Council decision on whether or not to grant the airport the certificates they’ve requested has also been delayed until November 22.

I thought the law meant it had to be done by 1st November?

 

[Finger66]

Council not got the ***** to admit they are wrong. Trying to find some additional spin to put on it?

 

[LBAYORKIE]

Council not got the ***** to admit they are wrong. Trying to find some additional spin to put on it?

I think someone posted a week or so ago that a limited extension was permitted.

 

[White Heather]

So now the Council are in breach of planning law by failing to make a decision within the specified timescale as well as seeking input that shouldn't be even admissible as evidence, and clearly they were wanting that input from they that shall not be named.

I can't even write down what I think of they who shall not be named. Nobody has yet invented a name for them that adequately describes them!

 

[The Pole]

4 letters with S on the end.

 

[LBAYORKIE]

I think someone posted a week or so ago that a limited extension was permitted.

An extension beyond 8 weeks is possible with an agreement between the applicant and LPA.

 

[Finger66]

Still think they are bottling making a decision for as long as possible whilst they work out how to break the news to they who shall not be named

 

[JRP]

So now the Council are in breach of planning law by failing to make a decision within the specified timescale as well as seeking input that shouldn't be even admissible as evidence, and clearly they were wanting that input from they that shall not be named.

I can't even write down what I think of they who shall not be named. Nobody has yet invented a name for them that adequately describes them!

I refer to them as the clown group, because they are one big circus

 

[White Heather]

They who shall not be named must be absolutely bricking it over this application.

So far they have fought to stop a new terminal which would have been one of the most environmentally friendly in Europe, because they didn't want the extra flights and up to 7m passengers. So now, they're going to get a terminal extension and upgrade that's in no way as green as the proposed new build, but they will still get the extra flights and up to 7m passengers anyway. Shot themselves in the foot big style . Embarrassing!

And now, because they complained that LBA had exceeded its night flying quota last summer, and because they have apparently infiltrated the Council itself with resultant refusal to acknowledge the clear meaning of the 1994 planning approval, they have forced the airport to seek a formal, legal decision as to what the approval actually means. As this is a legal matter in accordance with planning legislation, they cannot legally interfere. They know that if LBA succeed in any of the five CLEUDs it will basically pull the rug from under their feet and once again they will have shot themselves in the (other) foot.

Hopefully they shoot themselves in the head next time and shut up permanently.

 

[JRP]

An extension beyond 8 weeks is possible with an agreement between the applicant and LPA.

Can’t see why LBA would agree to this

 

[White Heather]

Can’t see why LBA would agree to this

Perhaps whilst an agreed compromise is negotiated? If LBA haven't agreed to it, then it only strengthens their grounds for appeal. Council asks for evidence that shouldn't be admissible, then fails to make a decision in accordance with the legal process. Not a good look!

 

[paully]

I can't even write down what I think of they who shall not be named. Nobody has yet invented a name for them that adequately describes them!

I could think of a few but I`d get barred......How about Rodneys???.....you know what Rodney is don`t you....go on

 

[tonysmith]

You plonker lol

 

[blotbuc1]

I assume that the Council will be trying to ensure that whatever decisions it makes on the certificate applications are watertight. If it grants them, there are no grounds for third parties to challenge the decisions. If it refuses them in whole, or in part there are not grounds for LBA to appeal the decisions. Hence why, as set out in the regulations for determining the applications, it called for any relevant, factual evidence from third parties and subsequently LBA has agreed to an extension of the time it has to make the decisions. (An extension of time has to be agreed in writing by the applicant)

It looks as though we are going to have to be patient and keep our fingers crossed for a successful outcome.