New UK airport terminal opens today after £100million expansion – with faster security and more restaurants
TAKE OFF New UK airport terminal opens today after £100million expansion – with faster security and more restaurants
LEEDS Bradford Airport (LBA) has announced the opening of its new terminal today.
The first phase of the airport's £100million expansion has been finished which means all passengers arriving and departing from the airport will experience the upgraded facilities.
Advertisement
3
Leeds Bradford Airport (LBA) has announced the opening of its new terminal today
Credit: hatchagency
3
This is the first phase of the airport's £100million expansion project
Credit: hatchagency
These included a more modern arrivals process which includes a new baggage reclaim area and an upgraded passport control facility with new technologies.
The airport also claims there is 83 per cent more seating and a wider offering of food and drink venues.
Passengers can also now use two premium lounges, including a new Six Eight One Premium Lounge.
The airport also shared that the second phase of the project at the airport has now begun, with a focus on refurbishing the existing terminal.
Advertisement
However, passengers should expect to see some changes at the airport in the coming months at the airport, especially with those departing from the airport.
When travellers arrive, they will notice some of the work including a relocated meet and greet parking area and changes to the bus pick-up and drop-off zones.
Back in March the airport released graphics of what parts of the new terminal look like, including sleek and stylish dining areas.
Once the project is fully complete in 2026, there will be 39 per cent more floorspace, 76 per cent more retail space, 83 per cent more seating, 77 per cent increase in luggage reclaim belt capacity and 50 per cent more security lanes.
Advertisement
Vincent Hodder, CEO, Leeds Bradford Airport commented: "We are delighted to see our new terminal extension open and operational today.
"It has been an incredible journey to get here, and we know our customers are going to get a completely new experience from LBA from today.
The new £7billion mega terminal opening at Changi Airport
"[T]he opening of this building is a huge achievement for all involved."
John Cunliffe, commercial director of Leeds Bradford Airport commented: "Today is a huge milestone for Leeds Bradford Airport.
Advertisement
"Our new terminal is officially open and ready to welcome passengers, offering improve facilities and enabling us to deliver an enhanced experience for passengers in the region.
"As we transition into Phase 2 of the project, the changes will impact the usual passenger flows, and we'd like to thank passengers in advance for their understanding."
Another major UK airport's plans for millions more passengers ahead of £1.1bn expansion – with new flights to Europe this year.
Plus, one of Europe's busiest airports is getting a new £3.6bn terminal next year offering a 'glimpse into future of travel'.
Advertisement
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
23-07-2025
- BBC News
Leeds Bradford Airport loses appeal over night-time flights limit
Leeds Bradford Airport has failed in its appeal against a decision to limit the number of night flights it can City Council rejected the site's interpretation of night-flying rules in 2024 after accusations the limit on permitted night flights had been breached over several years, but the airport appealed the decision.A public inquiry took place in March and April to determine the legal meaning of the night-time flying rules, with the government planning inspectorate dismissing two of the airport's three airport spokesperson said they were "reviewing the outcomes of the public inquiry and will be working closely with the council to determine the best path forward". Council officers were "working through the detail of the decisions to assess any potential planning implications," a spokesperson for the authority Leeds Bradford Airport is permitted 2,920 take offs and landings between 23:00 and 07:00 during the campaign group Group for Action on Leeds Bradford Airport (GALBA) said the airport had breached that limit in each of the past three inspectorate's decision was welcomed by members of GALBA, with secretary Ian Coatman describing it as "a victory for local people, our environment and common sense". The airport previously admitted it did "accidentally" breach the night-time regulations in 2022 due to "errors taking place in reporting procedures", but claimed it had not gone over the limits in 2023 and 2024 based on its interpretation of the rules."While it doesn't mean an end to all night flights, it does mean the airport must stick to the rules that limit the number of planes allowed to fly at night," said Mr Coatman, who lives near the airport in bosses had wanted newer aircraft to be exempt from the cap, as well as smaller planes and flights which had been made three applications to the council for Certificates of Lawful Existing Use or Development (CLEUDs), asking them to reinterpret the meaning of the local night flight planning conditions.A spokesperson said updating the rules would "provide the correct legal interpretation of the existing planning conditions governing the operation of night flights at LBA".However, two CLEUD applications were rejected by the council and the third was left "undecided", prompting LBA to planning inspectorate dismissed two of the three appeals, but said the council's decision to reject an exemption for some smaller, less noisy planes was "not well-founded". Listen to highlights from West Yorkshire on BBC Sounds, catch up with the latest episode of Look North.
Spectator
22-07-2025
- Spectator
A new regulator won't help solve the issue of Thames Water
Hurrah! We are going to get a new water regulator. Sir John Cunliffe's independent water commission has recommended that Ofwat be abolished and replaced with a new body which also incorporates the drinking water inspectorate. It will be yet one more opportunity for a quangocrat to take a plumb job, while Ofwat's bosses are pensioned off generously, no doubt. But what are the chances of getting rid of Thames Water, Southern Water or any other failing water company? That doesn't seem so likely. Rather, Cunliffe has pitched his report as an attempt to rebuild confidence in the existing water companies. It doesn't recommend what the government should do when faced with businesses which have mortgaged their assets to pay themselves fat dividends and bonuses, failed to invest properly in new infrastructure – and which then go to the government with a begging bowl. If the likes of Thames Water are not allowed to go bust, then just what was the point of privatising the water industry? Surely the two main objectives of privatisation are to transfer financial risk from the taxpayer to private capital and to improve performance by introducing competition. In the case of the water industry, neither was achieved. All it succeeded in doing was to swap a state monopoly for private monopolies, while water customers are left with the tab of picking up the pieces when water companies get into trouble. It says all you need to know about the water industry that companies are still threatening hosepipe bans even after a sopping weekend when many places received half a month's rainfall. Water companies bleat about climate change causing more droughts and therefore making rationing necessary; what they don't say is that actually rainfall in Britain has increased by around 10 per cent over the past 60 years. Why can't they capture some of that extra water and provide the water we want rather than trying to patronise us by telling us how we could use less water? No significant new reservoir has been built in Britain since Kielder Water, which was completed in 1981. Thames Water once built a desalination plant but then chose not to use it even during a drought, saying it was too expensive. Water companies don't really want to supply us with water – they remain stuck in a public sector rationing mindset, even though they act very much as private companies when it comes to paying salaries and bonuses. The Cunliffe Review is a damp squib which will do little to improve the current situation. If we want a private water industry, it needs to be one with multiple players which compete to supply us with water, inviting us to choose between providers and tariffs. If that is too difficult to organise – and it is difficult to see how we could ever have more than one network of water pipes, so it would require complex market structures such as those which haven't always worked well in the electricity and gas industries – then there is little point in keeping the industry in the private sector. Water companies which get into financial trouble should be allowed to go bust and their assets picked up by the government from the receiver at the sort of discount you would expect when the assets of any failed company are auctioned off. I am no great fan of nationalised industry, but then at least we would have a monopoly which was accountable, unlike what we have now. Instead, we look doomed to carry on pretty much as we have been for the past 35 years, with water companies choosing to sweat their assets rather than invest in new infrastructure, and a regulator rather than consumers deciding how much water we need and how much we should be paying for it. The only difference is that that regulator will have a new logo.
The Guardian
21-07-2025
- The Guardian
Water review in England and Wales: seven key takeways
The biggest review into the water industry in England and Wales since firms were privatised in 1989 has said that the sector is 'broken' and requires fundamental reform. Sir John Cunliffe, the former Bank of England deputy governor who led the Independent Water Commission (IWC) review, has published a 465-page report to attempt to address an industry beset by underinvestment, rising pollution incidents, soaring customers bills and meaty shareholder payouts. The report makes 88 recommendations to government with significant ramifications for the industry and consumers. Here are some of the key takeaways. The report has said that a fundamental 'reset' of the water sector is needed with the proposed scrapping of existing regulators and replacing them with one body for England and one body for Wales. In England, this would lead to Ofwat and the Drinking Water Inspectorate being scrapped, and the removal of the environmental regulation functions for the Environment Agency and Natural England. Under the proposal a new combined, integrated regulator that would be 'less desk-based' would be set up. In Wales, Ofwat's economic responsibilities would be integrated into Natural Resources Wales. The government said on Monday it would adopt the plan. The IWC recommends that meters should be made compulsory for a 'wide range of circumstances', in a drive to force consumers to reduce household water consumption. That includes installing them for households in areas where there is not 'water stress'. It suggests that the water industry could look to the energy sector, where suppliers must install a smart meter if they are replacing a meter or installing a meter for the first time – unless there is a good reason not to. Proponents of smart meters argue they encourage households to use less water. However, larger households with high water usage would be at risk of paying more than a standard flat rate tariff. Water companies could be let off fines if the government accepts a recommendation to allow them 'regulatory forbearance'. The report argues that a regulatory regime should be established to improve the performance of struggling water companies, including tightening oversight of ownership and governance. However, as well as this 'enhanced power of direction' the regime should allow 'regulatory forbearance', which would see companies dodge some financial penalties potentially further enraging campaigners already furious about the rise in pollution incidents. In March, the Guardian revealed that troubled Thames Water – which could collapse into a temporary nationalisation – was asking to be spared billions of pounds of costs and fines over the next five years, claiming that potential investors would be scared off otherwise. The government will also adopt a recommendation to upgrade the existing Consumer Council for Water (CCW) to a fully fledged ombudsman for customers. It currently runs a voluntary ombudsman scheme. The report suggests a nationwide social tariff to help consumers who cannot afford their bills, which the CCW has campaigned for. The change would give customers a clearer route to resolving complaints, such as issues including sewage floods in their gardens and taps running dry because of burst pipes. The report says that the new water regulator would need to be able to offer 'suitable' remuneration, which would mean it would not have to follow 'public sector pay controls'. The argument runs that to be effective the regulator will need to be able to hire and develop 'high-calibre' engineers and staff with financial expertise to provide proper oversight of the infrastructure and funding operations of water companies. 'Attracting skilled staff will require the regulator to offer suitable remuneration, outside public sector pay controls,' the report says. The high pay of water company executives has long been a source of anger among critics of the industry, most recently reignited by Southern Water's chief executive receiving a doubled pay package. However, Cunliffe, said: 'We are not proposing the regulator should set pay scales for the industry. They do need to recruit, and you have to attract the best people. What really makes the public angry is when the pay is there but the performance is not.' The report said that the current metrics Ofwat uses to measure infrastructure resilience, such as sewer collapses, mains repairs and leaky pipes, is short-termist and 'backward-looking'. The report calls for new national resilience standards for infrastructure to help guarantee the maintenance of underground pipes and other water and water waste assets. It also says that the requirements for companies to map their assets should be strengthened. The commission suggests the new regulator should have the power to set minimum capital levels for water companies. That system could mirror the regime in the banking industry, where financial cushions meant to shock-proof the banking system from another 2008-style crash were introduced.
