Leeds Bradford: Airport Application To Amend Night Flying Quota Methodology

[HX3]

What reasonable argument could the unmentionables make? Noise would be punishable via the new quota system, and quieter, lower emission aircraft are encouraged. Mitigation measures are proposed in the form of insulation etc. LBA is currently an outlier with antiquated rules that are not aligned with CAA/Government guidance. LBA are not proposing anything unique, or particularly bespoke. Night flights would continue, even if the planning application failed. So, other nimbyism, I don’t see under what grounds they could complain.

 

[Len Fish]

From their website:
“More night flights would blight local communities and pollute our environment!”
They’re going down the route of the impact of noise on human health, the impact of frequent night time noise on health and the climate damage the plans would allegedly cause. They’re also challenging the economic benefits that LBA have put forward.
So just the usual stuff that hinders any sort of progress in this country and is a smokescreen for nimbyism.

 

[White Heather]

From their website:
“More night flights would blight local communities and pollute our environment!”
They’re going down the route of the impact of noise on human health, the impact of frequent night time noise on health and the climate damage the plans would allegedly cause. They’re also challenging the economic benefits that LBA have put forward.
So just the usual stuff that hinders any sort of progress in this country and is a smokescreen for nimbyism.

They totally disregard the benefits of attracting quieter aircraft because acknowleding that as fact totally undermines their basis for objecting. Same with the reduction on pollution. Their entire strategy is based around reducing aircraft movements at LBA and ideally, the airport closing. As long as they can sleep soundly with their teddybears, they couldn't give a toss about lost jobs and job opportunities. They are the ultimate example of selfishness.

 

[JRP]

They totally disregard the benefits of attracting quieter aircraft because acknowleding that as fact totally undermines their basis for objecting. Same with the reduction on pollution. Their entire strategy is based around reducing aircraft movements at LBA and ideally, the airport closing. As long as they can sleep soundly with their teddybears, they couldn't give a toss about lost jobs and job opportunities. They are the ultimate example of selfishness.

I wish I knew where some of them lived, I would go rev my motorbike up outside there house at 2am.

But that’s the point as Heather says there argument is movements, they would rather have noisy aircraft and less movements, as this planning application is about noise, the council could easily turn round and say to LBA your based aircraft have to be Neo’s and Max’s to get it passed

 

[Jetchaser]

I mentioned about seeing a planning application for a runway extension and here it is: 26/9/00128/MOD

Tue 18 Aug 2026

Leeds And Bradford Airport Whitehouse Lane Yeadon Leeds LS19 7TZ

Variation of condition 15 of application No. 29/114/93/FU - removal of part highway improvement scheme (part c and e) NON MATERIAL AMENDMENT to 07/02208/FU Revert the back to the original description of development approved under the original permission (ref. 77/28/00436) to "Laying out of runway extension, with enlarged apron area and new roads system and new balancing reservoir site, to airport."

Current

[Can't see what I read before saying 300m extension

 

[White Heather]

I mentioned about seeing a planning application for a runway extension and here it is: 26/9/00128/MOD

Tue 18 Aug 2026

Leeds And Bradford Airport Whitehouse Lane Yeadon Leeds LS19 7TZ

Variation of condition 15 of application No. 29/114/93/FU - removal of part highway improvement scheme (part c and e) NON MATERIAL AMENDMENT to 07/02208/FU Revert the back to the original description of development approved under the original permission (ref. 77/28/00436) to "Laying out of runway extension, with enlarged apron area and new roads system and new balancing reservoir site, to airport."

Current

[Can't see what I read before saying 300m extension

Hard to be sure, but it looks like it is to remove a planning condition relating to highways improvement, possibly a S106 requirement, that is now redundant, and revert back to the original conditions as stated in the runway extension approval (early 80s). Probably just 'tidying up' so if this is approved there are no outstanding loose ends that never happened.