Hertfordshire County Council objects to Luton Airport expansion, due to negative environmental impacts

Proposals to expand Luton Airport have been described as “madness” by a Hertfordshire county councillor.  The council unanimously voted to oppose further expansion of Luton airport at a meeting on 26th November, as they realised the expansion plans to increase to 32 million passengers a year by 2039 (from almost 17m now) would harm the environment. The airport’s proposals – to be decided by Luton Borough Council – include a second terminal north of the runway, an extensive new airfield infrastructure and a third station. There is a huge conflict of interest, as Luton Council both owns the airport, and decides on its planning applications.  At a time of growing realisation of the climate crises the planet faces, and with no realistic ways to reduce the carbon emissions from aviation, the industry should NOT be given permission to expand. The growth plans of airports across the country add up to a massive expansion in the number of flights and passengers, way above what could be compatible even with aiming for net-zero carbon by 2050 (and that is at least 20 years too late).The motion also called for Luton’s plans to be deferred until the new government has set out the Aviation Strategy, for the UK aviation sector, taking into account the advice of the CCC.  
.

 

Hertfordshire County Council objects to Luton Airport expansion

By Daisy Smith   (St Albans Review)
2nd December 2019

Proposals to expand Luton Airport have been described as “madness” by a county councillor.

Hertfordshire County Council unanimously voted to oppose further expansion of the airport at a meeting last Tuesday (November 26).

Councillors said the expansion to cater for 32 million passengers a year by 2039 would harm the environment.

The proposals – which will be decided by Luton Borough Council – include a second terminal north of the runway, an extensive new airfield infrastructure and a third station.

Liberal Democrat councillor for Colney Heath and Marshalswick John Hale said: “Expanding the airport to 32 million passengers a year when we are trying to reduce carbon emissions is madness.

“The impact on residents in terms of increased noise and pollution is unacceptable.

“I am pleased the motion got the support of all parties at the council.”

The motion also called for any proposed plans to expand to be deferred until the new government has responded to a letter from national body Committee on Climate Change.

The letter calls for a reduction in airport expansion plans in order to reduce emissions from aviation.

Liberal Democrat parliamentary candidate Daisy Cooper welcomed the decision made by the council.

She said: “The expansion of Luton Airport would not only have a massive impact on the climate, but also on the people of St Albans who live under the flightpath.”

London Luton Airport Ltd is holding a second consultation on its proposals. Deadline for comments is December 16.

The airport said the expansion could deliver more than 16,000 new jobs and bring £1.3 billion per year to Hertfordshire, Bedfordshire and Buckinghamshire.

It also said a new funding package will be made to provide £7.5 million to authorities outside of Luton that will be most impacted by the airport.

It added it is making steps to reduce its carbon emissions.

Luton Airport corporate director Graham Olver added: “The airport is aware that neighbouring authorities take a deep interest to expand the airport.

“The airport is keen to hear the views of as many people as possible and would encourage people to attend one of its remaining six consultation events.”

To share your views, visit: futureluton.llal.org.uk

https://www.stalbansreview.co.uk/news/18074877.hertfordshire-county-council-objects-luton-airport-expansion/

.

 


Future Luton

https://futureluton.llal.org.uk/

.


The main local community group is LADACAN

(Luton and District Association for the Control of Aircraft Noise)

http://www.ladacan.org/

They say:

Luton Airport’s owners want a massive further increase in capacity by adding 14 million more passengers on top of the 18 million a year already using the Airport, so they can make even more money at the expense of quality of life for all of us.

We all have until 16th December to submit hard-hitting objections to their plans.

Local people are very concerned about the proposed expansion because it would:

  • cause 77,000 extra journeys a day on congested roads and rail services
  • increase local pollution and contribution to climate change by over 50%
  • add a further 80,000 flights a year to our already noisy and crowded skies

Click the links below to find out more about what YOU can do to help stop this:

1) Find out more by attending one of the local roadshows >> Roadshows

2) Submit a strong objection and spread the word to others >> Objections

3) Email us at info@ladacan.org to go on the mailing list

THIS IS IMPORTANT AND WE NEED TO ACT NOW !!

OTHER NEWS:

Luton Airport wants to break yet another planning condition
Not content with breaching its night noise planning condition, Luton Airport now wants to exceed its 18-million passenger limit, without delivered the mitigations which went hand-in-hand with the growth permission. >> Airport wants to exceed passenger limit

Updated application to exceed noise contour limits
Planning Condition 10 is designed to keep Luton Airport growth in balance: more flights, but quieter planes. The airport has rushed the growth ahead of the quieter planes, and now wants the rules set aside. Latest update >> Object to Condition 10 Variation

What’s Condition 10 Variation all about? Click here to visit our FAQ page

.


This is LADACAN’S advice on responding to the consultation:

LADACAN opposes FutureLuToN proposals

We have until 16th December to register strong opposition to LLAL’s expansion plans.

LADACAN believes the FutureLuToN project is designed to make more cash for LLAL at the expense of quality of life and the environment in the whole surrounding area. There are a number of reasons why this Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project would not be in the public interest, and we have summarised them below.

If you agree, and want to OPPOSE this project, you need to review our objections, put them in your own words and add your own additional points (perhaps your reaction to what you saw at one of the LLAL roadshows, or your experience from the expansion project which has been happening over the last 7 years) and email them as objections.

This is probably less risky than being suckered by their online application form when ends to manipulate responses to make them look as if they are in support.

GROUNDS FOR OBJECTION – COMMUNITIES WILL BE ADVERSELY IMPACTED

FutureLuToN is bad for communities which already suffer the unmitigated impacts of the recent doubling of capacity – on the busiest routes an additional 90% flights a year. To cram in more passengers, the aircraft have got bigger and noisier, and the number of quieter-engine planes has been offset by introducing more of the larger noisier ones.

TO OBJECT: If you agree with that point, you can copy this email address or click on it to email futureluton@llal.org.uk and base your objection in your own words on our points below:

“I strongly oppose any additional expansion of capacity at Luton Airport on the grounds that it is not in the public interest for the following reasons:

300-450 planes a day already fly at very low altitude over Hertfordshire causing noise, loss of sleep and negative health effects which impact people’s wellbeing. None of effects of doubling capacity from 9 to 18 million passengers between 2013 and 2019 have been mitigated: planes are still held low for up to 16 miles, aircraft have got larger and noisier, the Airport has breached its noise contour limits since 2017.

All of this has seriously degraded quality of life in Hertfordshire, over which all of Luton’s arriving and departing aircraft must fly.

Luton Airport has no control over the complete UK Airspace redesign being delivered in the next few years, other airport expansions such as Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted and unknown Brexit effects. It is madness to consider any further expansion plans until we see the outcome of these vital external influences.

Luton is simply trying to jump on the bandwagon of projections for airport capacity which are out of date and unjustifiable in today’s climate. “Making best use of the runway” is not an adequate justification for adding 14 million to the 18 million passengers a year at this Airport so that Luton Borough Council can make yet more money.

The government’s Aviation Policy Framework requires the benefits of airport growth to be balanced with mitigations for the environmental impacts. The current expansion project has taken all the benefits but delivered no balancing mitigations. Night flights have doubled in the past 5 years from 8,000 to 16,000 per year and the night noise contour limit has been exceeded for 3 years.

Since 2013, Luton Airport had doubled its capacity and delivered huge revenue increases BUT: planes are still held low for up to 16 miles; the fleet has become noisier because the 5% slightly quieter neo aircraft have been offset by 5% more of the larger, louder Airbus A321 and Boeing 777 types; flight paths have remained fixed in an out-of-date airspace design.

The current expansion project was due to run until 2028 and should be required to continue until then with no further additional capacity even being considered until all of the noise mitigations have been delivered and all of the existing noise planning conditions satisfied including a reduction of noise contours and a reduction of noise violation limits.

Name, Address, Postcode”

GROUNDS FOR OBJECTION – CLIMATE WILL BE ADVERSELY IMPACTED

FutureLuToN is bad for climate change given the strong effect which aviation has not just from high-level pollutants but contrails which cause additional clouds. The Climate Change Committee has written to government clearly stating that aviation growth must be at least halved to reach net zero by 2050 – the bare minimum we must do to survive.

TO OBJECT: If you agree with that point, you can copy this email address or click on it to email futureluton@llal.org.uk and base your objection in your own words on our points here:

“I strongly oppose any additional expansion of capacity at Luton Airport on the grounds that it is not in the public interest for the following reasons:

DfT aviation demand forecasts in 2017 pegged Luton at 18 million passengers until 2050. In 2019 the Climate Change Committee wrote to government saying that airport expansion must be slashed by at least 50% in order to meet the commitment to net zero carbon emission growth by 2050. Yet Luton’s expansion plan ignores both these facts.

Aviation is one of the most energy and carbon intensive forms of transport, whether measured per passenger km or per hour travelling. In the UK, aviation’s share of emissions is predicted to grow from around 6% today to 25% by 2050, even if the sector is successfully capped at level of 37.5 MtCO2 (equivalent to 2005 levels) as been recommended by the Committee on Climate Change.

Aircraft emit CO2, NOx and harmful particulates while taxiing on the ground and while airborne. The most recent evidence indicates that other non-CO2 effects due to release of high-altitude NOx and formation of contrail clouds could double the warming impact of aviation.

Newer engines are only about 15% more fuel efficient. Official UK forecasts predict annual fleet carbon-efficiency improvements of less than one percent between now and 2050.

Luton Airport has already doubled in capacity in just the last 7 years. It is not appropriate for it to continue this trajectory because no proven and effective mitigations for noise, pollution and increased carbon emissions have been delivered.

Name, Address, Postcode”

GROUNDS FOR OBJECTION – ROAD AND RAIL NETWORKS ARE INADEQUATE

FutureLuToN is bad for commuters because the additional 14 million passengers will cause on average 77,000 additional journeys to and from the airport each day, double that during peak season, clogging road and rail services and causing more pollution. Luton has a very poor track record of passenger use of public transport.

TO OBJECT: If you agree with that point, you can copy this email address or click on it to email futureluton@llal.org.uk and base your objection in your own words on our points here:

“I strongly oppose any additional expansion of capacity at Luton Airport on the grounds that it is not in the public interest for the following reason:

Surface transport by road and rail to and from Luton Airport is busy and often very congested, with no east/west public transport provision. An extra 30,000 passenger rail journeys a day would degrade our already inadequate rail services.

In just the last 7 years, 9 million additional passengers a year have already been added to the road and rail networks feeding Luton Airport, which equates to more than 80,000 passenger journeys a day allowing for drop-off, at busy times.

There is no east/west rail connection to Luton, and the east/west road links are country roads. The main M1 north/south link is heavily congested at busy times and gridlocks if an incident occurs. Trains are often standing room only at Harpenden and further south in the rush hour, and from London going north during the evening peak.

Name, Address, Postcode”

GROUNDS FOR OBJECTION – THE PROPOSER HAS BROKEN TRUST

FutureLuToN is bad for confidence in balanced growth – the airport has taken all the benefits of the recent expansion but failed to deliver better routes, increased altitudes, reduced noise, a quieter fleet, and no evidence that the claimed jobs have materialised. The entire airspace in the south-east is due to be redesigned and until that happens nobody can be sure where these proposed 220,000 flights per year will actually go.

TO OBJECT: If you agree with that point, you can copy this email address or click on it to email futureluton@llal.org.uk and base your objection in your own words on our points here:

“I strongly oppose any additional expansion of capacity at Luton Airport on the grounds that it is not in the public interest for the following reasons:

Luton Airport is owned by Luton Borough Council, its Local Planning Authority, via a private company LLAL which is governed by a board made up of officers and members of the Borough Council, yet is not publicly accountable.

Robin Porter is the CEO of Luton Borough Council (which sets and has failed to enforce a breach of Luton Airport noise planning condition 10 caused by rapid growth). Robin Porter is also now the CEO of LLAL (which currently receives £55 million per year from the airport operators and benefits directly from airport growth). In 2014, LLAL set up a financial incentivisation scheme to stimulate rapid growth at Luton Airport (see p16 of the London Luton Airport Ltd 2016 annual accounts).

Since then, the airport capacity has grown at unprecedented rate, with numbers of passengers doubling in just 7 years, flights up by 40% overall, and yet no balancing mitigations have been delivered. Departures are still held low for up to 16 miles because expansion has rushed ahead of airspace modernisation. Noise impact has increased year-on-year since 2013 because expansion has rushed ahead of fleet modernisation. Night flights have doubled from 8,000 to 16,000 in 5 years and the night noise contour planning condition has been breached since 2017 with no enforcement.

This unbalanced expansion is entirely at odds with the government’s Aviation Policy which states that the benefits of aviation growth must be shared with communities. Over the past 7 years expansion at Luton, driven by LLAL through financial incentivisation, has delivered significant cash benefits to the airport owners, worse environmental impacts for local communities through increased noise, emissions and congestion,and no mitigation. 8 years remains of that project and the owners need to be constrained to deliver redesigned airspace, continuous climb, an overall quieter fleet, and noise and emissions reduction to redress the imbalance.

Even though the decision about future expansion at Luton will be taken by the Planning Inspectorate, the past history of expansion shows that Luton Borough Council has proved ineffective in dealing with the conflict of interest arising because it receives significant cash dividends from the airport but at the same time has a responsibility to protect residential amenity. The fact that it has not enforced against the breach of noise planning condition 10 which was predicted in 2016 and was at least partly due to the  rapid growth incentivisation by LLAL, highlights the conflict.

Name, Address, Postcode”

BEWARE: if you do decide to fiull in their online response form, the questions are worded so that you can easily be suckered into appearing to agree with the proposals. For example, how do you answer the following question if you don’t think they should build a new Terminal on a park:

“Do you have any comments on our proposed park, that would replace Wigmore Valley Park?”

We would recommend prefixing the answer to every response by “I strongly oppose any further capacity expansion at Luton Airport, and I want to see the owners and operators focus on delivering mitigations and abiding by all the current planning conditions.”

See http://www.ladacan.org/llal-consultation-on-futureluton-proposals/

.

.

.

.