Leeds Bradford Airport £100m Regeneration Programme

[White Heather]

Just a quick question for those on here with possibly more info, the terminal extension is to be 9,500 sq metres in size, is that 9,500sq m divided roughly into 3 with it been 3 stories to give an overall building area of 3,170 sq m or is 9,500sq m the size of the building? Got me thinking.

Fairly certain it's 9500m2 in total and I assume that's all 3 levels, although the basement might not necessarily have as much useable space as the the upper two floors. To put that into context an average football pitch is 6400m2 so the total area is a the equivalent of 1.5 football pitches across the three levels. In old money, it's just over 102,000 sq feet, so small, it isn't!

 

[LBA4EVER]

Fairly certain it's 9500m2 in total and I assume that's all 3 levels, although the basement might not necessarily have as much useable space as the the upper two floors. To put that into context an average football pitch is 6400m2 so the total area is a the equivalent of 1.5 football pitches across the three levels. In old money, it's just over 102,000 sq feet, so small, it isn't!

Ok thanks for the info WH, so we are saying then that the extension could be the size of 1.5 football pitches,so basically the extension would cover 1.5 pitches? if thats the case then its very large, can we be certain on that?
When you look at the official LBA plans it looks to be roughly half the size of the current terminal.
Looking forwards to 2 years of construction!

 

[White Heather]

Ok thanks for the info WH, so we are saying then that the extension could be the size of 1.5 football pitches,so basically the extension would cover 1.5 pitches? if thats the case then its very large, can we be certain on that?
When you look at the official LBA plans it looks to be roughly half the size of the current terminal.
Looking forwards to 2 years of construction!

No, the 3 floors in total are the size of 1.5 football pitches, but just under 3,200sq mtrs or 34,000 sq feet per floor is pretty big.

 

[LBA4EVER]

No, the 3 floors in total are the size of 1.5 football pitches, but just under 3,200sq mtrs or 34,000 sq feet per floor is pretty big.

Ok get you wh, half a footy pitch in size is still pretty big, was gonna say 1.5 pitches is massive (off to check out a footy pitch now haha)

 

[Finger66]

Well there has been a lot of talk about they who shall not be named scoring a major own goal in stopping the new terminal being built. So this is clearly their penalty

 

[LBAYORKIE]

Well there has been a lot of talk about they who shall not be named scoring a major own goal in stopping the new terminal being built. So this is clearly their penalty

Well it wont be on their website, theyre still adamant about the 5 million and are hoping the Cleud goes their way.

 

[White Heather]

Well it wont be on their website, theyre still adamant about the 5 million and are hoping the Cleud goes their way.

They're absolutely Cleudless....

 

[LBAYORKIE]

They're absolutely Cleudless....

Im not confident given both depend on LCC. Still- fingers crossed!

 

[Hendi]

Im not confident given both depend on LCC. Still- fingers crossed!

I was under the Impression the airports new terminal can progress them to the 7 mill per annum they are trying to reach without the need for extra planning consent? Or anybodies say so?

 

[White Heather]

I was under the Impression the airports new terminal can progress them to the 7 mill per annum they are trying to reach without the need for extra planning consent? Or anybodies say so?

Correct. Leeds City Council sent a planning officer to a consultative meeting a few years ago and someone stated that there was a 5m limit according to they who shall not be named. He said that was not the case unless the airport needed to carry out works (to accommodate more pax) which require planning approval.

As the second phase of the forthcoming scheme is internal and doesn't impact on the terminal externally, no planning approval is required and therefore, according to that planning officer, and LBA management, the airport is able to increase capacity to the planned 6.8m.

 

[Hendi]

The only thing I can't get my head around is these clued is it the council who decides to award the airport them or someone else? I feel if it is lcc they will be week and be swayed by those we shall not name if they've sent evidence as they say they have... I was reading about cotswold airport recently and they were awarded a clued after the local council tried to close it down in 2009. Let's hope for a positive outcome for the airport.

 

[White Heather]

The only thing I can't get my head around is these clued is it the council who decides to award the airport them or someone else? I feel if it is lcc they will be week and be swayed by those we shall not name if they've sent evidence as they say they have... I was reading about cotswold airport recently and they were awarded a clued after the local council tried to close it down in 2009. Let's hope for a positive outcome for the airport.

I'm guessing its the Council but based on their legal advice. It's a legal matter.

Obviously LBA also has legal advice which forms the basis of the submission , so if the Council's advice is contrary to that given to the airport, an appeal to the Minister seems likely, and if that doesn't work, a further appeal to the High Court. Again, LBA wil act on legal advice when deciding whether to take it further.

LCC will know that this has the potential to go to appeal. Even if they don't like the outcome because it's in LBAs favour, the Council should not be rejecting the applications unless there are legally sound reasons to do so that can be defended in court

Let's hope that further action isnt needed and for a positive outcome.

 

[Hendi]

Thank you for explaining WH.

 

[Finger66]

My concern is the council will say no initially, even though they know there is a good chance of it being overturned on appeal. That way it’s not LCC who become the bad guys to they who shall not be named. What a set of wimps!

And also drags the decision on for as long as possible, thus delaying LBA’s growth

 

[White Heather]

My concern is the council will say no initially, even though they know there is a good chance of it being overturned on appeal. That way it’s not LCC who become the bad guys to they who shall not be named. What a set of wimps!

And also drags the decision on for as long as possible, thus delaying LBA’s growth

Yet the Councils official policy remains supporting the development of the airport.

The Council are playing with fire if they say no as you suggest when the legal advice is that they should approve. They are short of funds! The last thing they need is a hefty legal bill for a high court case that the ruling judge might consider frivolous. If the legal advice is to approve any if the CLEUDS they should approve them and make it clear that as this is a legal matter, in accordance with planning legislation, they had no choice .

 

[Len Fish]

LCC did admit early on that CLEUD applications are a matter of law and they were bound by the legal process, almost as if apologising to LBA’s opponents in advance that their hands were tied and couldn’t do them any favours if the airports applications met the legal requirements to be allowed.

 

[Finger66]

It is quite a weird one this. As @White Heather says LCC say they support LBA but yet they equally seem to side with ***** and actually hinder development. It will be very interesting to see how this all pans out and will be so satisfying to get one over on the enemy. If in LBAs favour this should be another kick start towards phenomenal growth

 

[White Heather]

It is quite a weird one this. As @White Heather says LCC say they support LBA but yet they equally seem to side with ***** and actually hinder development. It will be very interesting to see how this all pans out and will be so satisfying to get one over on the enemy. If in LBAs favour this should be another kick start towards phenomenal growth

I think the problem is that there are a number of anti airport sympathisers who are part of the Plans Panel, including a local Councillor who always opposes the airport (he voted against the new terminal), while one local Councillor on the panel, who supported it, lost his job after many years at the last local election. So despite official policy there are these people in a position to work against LBA without much challenge.

We also have the 'Climate Emergency' agenda and a local Councillor overseeing the Plans Panel whose main job is taking us into a world of cycling and walking by whatever means possible.

However, the CLEUD process should, if implemented according to law, take these people out of the equation. No doubt in my mind why one of the offending Councillors reported it to the press initially and why they all kicked off about it. They know that if successful, the airport have made a monkey of them all having been pushed into such action by their own actions, and those of they who shall not be named.

LBA seem absolutely confident about their own data and evidence, and they do seem to have a good case. For example, the references to future updated NOTAMs relating to future aircraft types and their Quota Counts are difficult to refute. The meaning in the 1994 Planning Approval seems clear enough to convince a reasonably thinking person and that's what is required.

 

[Finger66]

I think we all share that sentiment @White Heather so let's just hope this goes in LBA's favour at the first hurdle and avoids further delays to development. Then LBA's full potential can be unlocked

 

[Aviador]

If the council approve the CLEUD applications the airport should follow it up immediately with a reasonable set of measures to reduce the impact of night flying such as encouraging only the quietest and newest aircraft to use the airport. If the airport shows it can self regulate it will make future planning applications easier. If the airport doesn't self regulate properly it will risk further restrictions being inforced such as passenger limits the next time a 106 planning agreement is made.