Airport Consultative Committee [Questions & Responses]

[Aviador]

Re: Consultative Committee Questions

I would like to see the airport pushing the council into providing better road signage around the airport itself. For instance the new signs directing cars to the long stay car park at the bottom of White House Lane are poor to say the least. Last week I watched numerous cars going up towards the terminal before turning around to go back down the one-way road system the wrong way. Presumably they were looking for the new long stay car park entrance. Yesterday whilst driving past the airport on White House Lane I witnessed a car travelling down the wrong side of the road heading from the Yeadon end towards Horsforth before turning up towards the terminal. If signage isn't improved soon I would say there's probably going to be some nasty accidents before long. These are not one off incidents they appear to be happening all the time and on top of causing confusion they also form a bad first impression of our airport!

 

[White Heather]

Re: Consultative Committee Questions

Noted Aviador, although you will be aware that is a couple of months before the next meeting. I am not sure if the LA are responsible for car park signage - it may fall on the Airport itself to provide signage relating to purely airport activities, such as parking, with the LA provide more general 'non aiport specific' signage.

However, I will try to raise this next time if it is still an issue. Perhaps you could check on the situation again nearer the time and let me know if it remains a problem. The next meeting is on 30 April

 

[Aviador]

Re: Consultative Committee Questions

Thanks White Heather much appreciated. I will keep you posted on the situation over the next few weeks.

 

[Aviador]

Re: Consultative Committee Questions

The traffic problems seem to have settled down some what now. I think another look at the signs maybe advantageous.

Re: Your question about renders of the new terminal development.

I haven't come across any new renders of the terminal development so far sorry. I wonder if the airport are considering putting the details onto the airport website.

 

[White Heather]

Re: Consultative Committee Questions

OK Aviador, thanks.

I think the airport will do that if and when they get consent. Probably no point until then in case they are told to change it again.

 

[Aviador]

Re: Consultative Committee Questions

Any idea when we will know a little more about the timescale of the deferral?

 

[White Heather]

Re: Consultative Committee Questions

Aviador, the next meeting is next Thursday and all being well, I hope to attend. The terminal development is on the agenda, so I will let everyone know anything that we are told about this.

 

[User0001]

Re: Consultative Committee Questions

For me, the most interesting aspects regarding the terminal would be

1) where does the planning application go from here? What needs to be done and how long will it take?

2) does the airport think a greater show of public support for the proposals will influence the outcome?

If they do, it would be intriguing to find out why the airport don't ask passengers passing through the airport to register their support in some way or another. Given the council were prepared to accept pre-printed / identical letters of objection (which is exactly what the vast majority of the 900 objections were), shouldn't the airport be allowed to do the same. I'm guessing with 10,000 people a day passing through, it wouldn't take long to get significantly more than the 900.

 

[White Heather]

Re: Consultative Committee Questions

That is exactly what we (the Airport Support Group) did last time. We produced a standard statement of support for the relaxation of night flying and the future development of the airport, and left large supplies of them in receptacles around the airport, together with various boxes to collect them. All the public had to do was read it, and if they agreed, sign it. We collected them and took them in person to the planning department. We ended up with 14,000, 3.5 times as many as the objectors. The council had to respond to every individual who completed the form, and the result was their computers went down (probably not very good in those days!!). It worked though and we were told by the Airport MD that the level of support had removed the need for a Public Enquiry.

Now, there are only 2 of us, and neither of us are in a position to do quite so much again sadly, but it really can make a difference. Since the application is only deferred, I would presume that letters of objection/support are still being accepted, although someone would have to check. Another way is to issue letters of support for the airport development and objection to the actions of the council to defer it, to the planning department and copied to each of the councillors who sat on the committee and made that decision!!

 

[Aviador]

Re: Consultative Committee Questions

Well I think you can count us all in on this 'Airport Support Group' thing although I don't see why the airport itself can't do something similar this time rather than letting you do all the hard work. The airport no longer has any ties with the local council so there really shouldn't be any reason why they can't do something similar this time. Perhaps they haven't thought of it and need some gentle persuasion in the right direction? Presumably Bridgepoint will not be aware of what you did during previous applications? My contributions that time were numerous letters to the Yorkshire Evening Post, Wharfe Valley Times and the Wharfedale Observer, most were published.

 

[White Heather]

Re: Consultative Committee Questions

Funnily enough I was talking to Chris, who is my other half in the support group about that very thing tonight, and we decided that given the chance we will talk to the airport MD about what happened last time and try to see if something similar would be welcomed. We couldn't have done it last time without the help and provision of materials by the then airport boss.

If the airport don't want to do something themselves, Chris & myself simply don't have the time to do it again. We were at the airport every few days late at night collecting responses from the land-side and air-side, and we then had to sort them all out, make sure there were no duplicates, and also on that occasion, do some stats to show the areas that people lived in who had responded. It took ages. I don't regret doing it - in fact we are proud of what was achieved - but our respecitve situations have changed now and we have other commitments - in my case my family issues. However, the Support Group can be as big as necessary and if anyone else wanted to do it in conjunction with the airport, I am sure we could advise on what we did last time.

As I mentioned before though, we need to check that this would be possible now. The Council may have stopped taking such representations on board. Also, Bridgepoint may not wish such action to be taken in and around the terminal, and if not, there is no way of pulling together such support.

 

[wawkrk]

Re: Consultative Committee Questions

Or,
Write to.......
Development Department
The Leeds Planning Office
2 Rossington Street
Leeds
LS2 8HD

Planning ref: 08/06944

Or email...............
Email: [email protected]

 

[User0001]

Re: Consultative Committee Questions

As good a suggestion as it is, hardly no-one wrote in. Most people are not going to sit at home and compose a letter, so it needs something simple that a large number of people can get access to. For all of their supposed "fear" of airport expansion, few of the opponents actually bothered to lift a finger until it was made easy for them to do so. Someone stuck up a crap letter on a cheap website and said "send this to the council" and lo and behold, 500 people did. The airport could get this level of response in less than a day if it wanted. The question to ask tomorrow, is whether this is something they think is worthwhile. You might also want to suggest an on-line petition which is very easy to set-up and very easy to distribute.

Regarding the Airport Support Group, what is it and how do we join? There are a big group of people out there who are pro-expansion of LBA who, like me, won't be aware an official support group exists and that it has direct contact with the airport management.

If there is a call to arms tomorrow, then I wouldn't worry about being able to get people to help out. I'll volunteer now to set the on-line petition up if the message comes back that it would help.

 

[Aviador]

Re: Consultative Committee Questions

This is how the opposition are doing it... http://www.leedstidal.org/nolbaexpansion/

It's so annoying that a bunch of students, most not even from Leeds can cause so much havok, but they are very organised and we could learn a few lessons from them.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Re: Consultative Committee Questions

I suspect there is a national forum from whom airport objectors can be given templates for their websites and tactics.

There are certainly elements in this website that can be seen in the SBAE (StopBristolAirportExpansion) web site, one of the most highly-organised groups opposing any regional airport's development.

What I find worrying is that these groups will not engage in debate. There is nothing I can see on this website and cartainly nothing on the SBAE website that allows people to put constructive counter arguments.

On the website (BISON) that supports expansion of Bristol Airport there is a message board with sections devoted to the expansion issue. Only one objector has ever come on to argue their corner and he became so personally abusive to many BISON members that the web site administrator eventually had to block his access.

SBAE is well aware of BISON and, despite pleas to debate the issue on the BISON site AND to set up a similar facility on their own website, they refuse to become involved.

To me it demonstrates the weakness of their arguments. Many airport 'antis' are left-wing or liberal in their outlook yet some of their pronouncements, such as demanding people holiday where the antis say they should, are worthy of the worst kind of right-wing dictatorship.

 

[White Heather]

Re: Consultative Committee Questions

LS16 - The Airport Support Group was really formed back in the 80's by a half dozen local people who were sick of listening to LACAN and all the negative rubbish coming from local councillors. We objected to the bare faced lies being put about regarding thousands of flights taking off all night every night etc etc and arranged to meet the then airport MD to him we intended to redress the balance and how did he think it would best work. The rest (as they always say) is history. After the night flying ban was finally lifted, we pretty much went into retirement as there were only 2 of us left, and we have remained on the Consultative Committee since, generally there to represent the supportive public and oppose the likes of LACAN (who are still members, but for some reason have stopped attending!).

So the Support Group now is nothing more than a name really which allows us to continue to attend the meetings and speak on behalf of Joe Public and all you guys out there who support the airport. The Group could easily grow to include others if action was required to demonstrate support. I suppose all that would be required is for myself and Chris to agree to specific individuals being co-opted on. Really, the only reason for having such a name is that it enabled us to approach the Airport as an organised group to see what we could do.

If we can, we will try to find out from the airport bosses if they would welcome intervention in this way and if so, whether they would be prepared to help as the old MD did before. If not, it would be impossible to collect support from the airport and an on line petition would seem the best way forward. In fact in this day and age, it may be THE best way to make an impact since it avoids all the running around collecting papers and taking them to the Council planning department etc, so if you are prepared to do something like that it would be great. It would not even require 'approval' from the airport, although I do still feel it would be the right thing to do to discuss it with them first.

I suppose though, that the big question would be how to publicise its existence to maximise the number of nice names and addresses signing up to it.

 

[Aviador]

Re: Consultative Committee Questions

Out of Interest White Heather, have you ever thought about inviting Chris to join this forum? Also, I have renamed the "Friends of Leeds Bradford Airport" thread to "Airport Support Group"

 

[wawkrk]

Re: Consultative Committee Questions

I received a very quick response to my email supporting the airport expansion.
I used my address in Bramhope for the email to show I am really a local resident.
Part of the response below.Standard reply.

Thank you for your comments, received on 30 April 2009, about the above application. They will be taken into account when making a decision. We will let you know the decision within 7 working days of it being made. We will be making details of the application, including any comments we receive, available on our website on Public Access and you can use this to monitor the progress of the application at www.leeds.gov.uk/publicaccess.

We do not consider anonymous comments and all comments can be viewed by anyone, including the applicant. If you wish to withdraw your comments please let us know in writing as soon as possible, however if you do so they will not be taken into account.

If you have any queries, please contact the Development Enquiry Centre on the number at the top of the letter.

 

[Aviador]

Re: Consultative Committee Questions

I got the same response when I submitted the posts from here. The posts may be classed as one response, but it was clearly marked from the UK Airport Forum.

 

[White Heather]

Re: Consultative Committee Questions

Right guys, the outcome of today.

We had a chat before the meeting with Carl Papworth, who was actually the guy who attended the planning meeting and takes the lead on the terminal development issues. We also spoke to the Airport's publicity officer after the meeting. The outcome is that they are very much encouraged by the support, but that any on line petition sent to the council, whether it had 10 names on it or 10,000 names, counts only as one letter of support. For planning purposes therefore, it is not the way to go.

We asked about doing something similar to last time, or even the airport doing something on those lines itself, but they felt it was too late in the day now. What they asked is that people individually write to express their support, and their concern over the deferral, not to the planning department, but to the members of the Leeds West planning committee, especially the chairman, who incidentally is a member of the Consultative Committee and surprise surprise, didn't show today. In fact, nobody from Leeds City Council showed up. Perhaps just as well really. The names of all the Committee members are available (apparently) on the Council planning website.

The airport expect the application to go back in front of the Committee for further consideration in June. Perhaps understandably, they were a little reluctant to say too much, but it was clear that this is not an issue they intend giving up on. They are still having regular meetings though with the planning department and although nothing was said, it seemed that the planning officer was probably as surprised at the deferral as everyone else was. Any letters to councillors therefore need to be before the end of May - the sooner the better.

They confirmed that the terminal building plans were well supported, as was the principle of expansion, but obviously surface access and global warming (which is actually a central government issue and not within the remit of the council planners) appear to have become unwelcome distractions, along with the taxi drivers.

It was confirmed that the terminal development would create a minimum of 2,000 jobs directly.

The issue of bus services was discussed, and everyone agreed what the planning committee failed to understand, which is that first you have to have the passenger numbers and the variety of services to attract sufficient passengers to sustain the bus services. To do that, you first have to have an airport capable of handling those passengers, which means the expanded terminal. It is a clear chicken and egg situation.

I suggested that since public transport was obviously an issue, the Airport could demonstrate something tangible by working towards a shuttle bus service picking up rail passengers from Horsforth and Guiseley. The shuttle could be booked on the airport web site so as to prevent shuttles going up and down to/from stations for no purpose, but this would effectively give the airport an available rail link as a short term solution until a tram train could be provided - said to be a minimum 5 years away yet. The idea actually received a very warm reception from the MD who said that they would be talking to the appropriate people about this as a real possibility. Actually, I think it would be good to rename the stations Horsforth/Leeds Bradford Airport and Guiseley/Leeds Bradford Airport if this service was put in place.

On other issues, it was confirmed there were 'no plans' to change the name of the Airport, although it was suggested that to compliment Robin Hood Airport, LBA should be renamed Dick Turpin Airport since the parking charges were highway robbery (my parking charge from 1410 to 1700 was £9 although I had a get out of jail free card fortunately). I did think the new car park access ramps and landscaping etc was a vast improvement on before though. Nice new baggage trolleys advertising Ryanair on all of them too - at a cost of £1 now, but all new machines.

Lasers - there has been 9 incidents this year. The Police Helicopter is now scrambled when incidents are reported and th airport understands that there has been some arrests already although it has not been confirmed.

KLM - The airport are keen to see more flights and bigger aircraft on the AMS route now LHR has gone. They are talking to the airline about it.

Flybe - The first flights out to LGW appear to have been retimed and will now leave LBA at 0815. At present return seats are available for under £50, but average return fares overall are expected to be around £140, which is less than the standard 2nd class rail fare, which is scheduled to increase shortly by 11%. Over 500 seats were booked on the route in the first week, which is apparently exceptionally high, especially in the current climate.

PIA - the service continues to attract very high passenger loads and there is every chance of further expansion on the route by the airline in future. It was stated that PIA have confirmed they are to replace the A310 on the LBA route with the Boeing 777. No ifs or buts - confirmed, but no date yet when it will happen.

That's all folks. I will put some entries also on the relevant threads for KLM , Flybe and PIA.