Leeds Bradford: Airport Application To Amend Night Flying Quota Methodology

[Len Fish]

Yet another document with comments has appeared on the portal, this time from WYCA. They are concerned about “sustainable” access (code for getting people out of their cars) to and from the airport during night hours both for passengers and staff. Like others they suggest an enhanced bus service with LBA making a financial contribution towards this. There is also a suggestion that dedicated transport could be provided for staff. They would also like a study into both passenger and staff travel patterns over the whole 24 hour period to better understand what is needed to enhance sustainable travel.
Not a whisper about any rail link, surprise, surprise.

 

[lbaspotter]

If Leeds City council & WYCA force the airport to fund the new Weaver Network Franchise bus operator (Tower Transi) to operate the bus routes 24 hours. I suspect it would be limited to an hourly service (00:00 to 05:00) A1 to Leeds and the A2 as it’s the quickest route into Bradford.

The A2 to Harrogate could feasibly then gain earlier 04:30 & later 20:10, 21:10, 22:10 & 23:10 journeys, I do not see that part of the route running 24 hours as it’s a less populated.

If any of the above happened to keep costs down I don’t see any extra journeys on the A3 service..

 

[Pudseylad]

Yet another document with comments has appeared on the portal, this time from WYCA. They are concerned about “sustainable” access (code for getting people out of their cars) to and from the airport during night hours both for passengers and staff. Like others they suggest an enhanced bus service with LBA making a financial contribution towards this. There is also a suggestion that dedicated transport could be provided for staff. They would also like a study into both passenger and staff travel patterns over the whole 24 hour period to better understand what is needed to enhance sustainable travel.
Not a whisper about any rail link, surprise, surprise.

Not a problem - me and my missus will be on our tandem with suitcase panniers!!!

 

[michael]

Yet another document with comments has appeared on the portal, this time from WYCA. They are concerned about “sustainable” access (code for getting people out of their cars) to and from the airport during night hours both for passengers and staff. Like others they suggest an enhanced bus service with LBA making a financial contribution towards this. There is also a suggestion that dedicated transport could be provided for staff. They would also like a study into both passenger and staff travel patterns over the whole 24 hour period to better understand what is needed to enhance sustainable travel.
Not a whisper about any rail link, surprise, surprise.

Isn't this the council that pulled all the road improvements a couple of years ago?? Sounds to me like they're wanting the cake, eating it, then coming back for seconds!!

 

[White Heather]

Isn't this the council that pulled all the road improvements a couple of years ago?? Sounds to me like they're wanting the cake, eating it, then coming back for seconds!!

It's what they do. Don't do any road or transport improvements then tell the airport that they can have their approval provided the agree to S106 requirements that make them pay for what the council won't.

 

[Snackbar]

If Leeds City council & WYCA force the airport to fund the new Weaver Network Franchise bus operator (Tower Transi) to operate the bus routes 24 hours. I suspect it would be limited to an hourly service (00:00 to 05:00) A1 to Leeds and the A2 as it’s the quickest route into Bradford.

The A2 to Harrogate could feasibly then gain earlier 04:30 & later 20:10, 21:10, 22:10 & 23:10 journeys, I do not see that part of the route running 24 hours as it’s a less populated.

If any of the above happened to keep costs down I don’t see any extra journeys on the A3 service..

Oh the same WYCA that has been sitting on the Parkway station plans for the last 7 years despite spending millions on consultants and business cases!

Exert from LCCs Transport Behavioural change team (yes there really is one!) report on the portal

“For many years we have been asking the Airport to provide long stay secure cycle parking for passengers. At present the Airport website still says “Bicycles may be left chained up in any sensible area of our public car parks excluding the Pick Up & Drop Off car park and the terminal front itself.”

“Passengers need secure long stay cycle parking and this needs to be secured as part of any planning”

It would be laughable if these people weren’t being paid by you and me to put out such ludicrous statements……How many folks do they really thing are going to cycle to the airport to take a flight! This council get more ludicrous the day!

 

[Len Fish]

Yet another example of common sense and practicality being sacrificed on the altar of green dogma.

 

[Seasider]

How long would it take me to cycle from the East Coast - 10 hrs?

 

[airforced]

Very sensible post Snackbar and straight to the point too, pointing the finger at the stupidity we see time and time again from the Council.

However, if LBA agree to a S106 agreement (with caveats I would hope) they must see some benefit in doing so. Otherwise they should reject the idea out of hand and maybe in doing so direct a few home truths in the opposite direction with their reasons why.

 

[Snackbar]

Very sensible post Snackbar and straight to the point too, pointing the finger at the stupidity we see time and time again from the Council.

However, if LBA agree to a S106 agreement (with caveats I would hope) they must see some benefit in doing so. Otherwise they should reject the idea out of hand and maybe in doing so direct a few home truths in the opposite direction with their reasons why.

Part of me thinks it would be better if the airport gained approved only after an appeal as it would be highly likely that these ridiculous attempts at pushing these S106 conditions would be challenged and lost…..It was a point made clear by LCC planning department at the meeting to approve the brand new terminal and a reason why LCC chose to approve the plan!

 

[White Heather]

Part of me thinks it would be better if the airport gained approved only after an appeal as it would be highly likely that these ridiculous attempts at pushing these S106 conditions would be challenged and lost…..It was a point made clear by LCC planning department at the meeting to approve the brand new terminal and a reason why LCC chose to approve the plan!

Although I was told one member of the plans panel voted against the new terminal because he considered the S106 requirements didn't go far enough. He wanted even more. And he is still on the plans panel.

 

[Len Fish]

Given they’re strapped for cash I suppose LCC will push the S106 “blackmail” as far as they can.

 

[White Heather]

Given they’re strapped for cash I suppose LCC will push the S106 “blackmail” as far as they can.

Let's hope that because they are strapped for cash, they don't reject, pushing LBA into an appeal, the costs of which, should the council lose, they may have to pay.

 

[Cookridge resident]

I was under the impression that the Parkway Station ground to a halt due to WY not receiving the necessary funding in the second round of the “levelling up” funding under the previous government.
That’s what I was told anyway. Happy to be corrected if wrong.

 

[White Heather]

As per the last ACC and my report, LBA expect funding to be approved in the new year for the Parkway Station allowing it to move forward towards completion in 2030.

Quote from my report:

''The Parkway Station saga continues. The WYCA are producing a paper and business case in late October for presentation which will hopefully see approval in January 2027. A start could be made a year later with completion 2030. LBA are also seeking to have LBA included in the Mass Transit scheme.''