Airport News
Below are news items relating to specific airports
A sad day for democracy as Luton Council approves Luton airport expansion
HALE have commented, on the hastily convened development control committee meeting on Luton airport's expansion application, that it was a sad day for democracy. A 9-hour meeting ended by approving plans for doubling the capacity of Luton Airport from 9 million to 18 million passengers per annum. Only 5 voting members of the 11-strong development control committee were present, plus the chair. Objectors from local town and parish councils, campaign groups and private individuals voiced serious concerns about the proposals. These included number of late evening and early morning flights; reduction in quality of life due to aircraft noise; damage to health from noise and air pollution; and noise control, among others. Unfortunately none of the councillors had the courage to oppose the plans. Andrew Lambourne, from HALE, said: “Ultimately this was such a big decision that to make it with half the committee absent was simply not democratic – and is another good reason why it should be called in” he added.
Click here to view full story...
Council backs Luton airport expansion but it needs Sec of State Eric Pickles’ authorisation
Luton Airport’s expansion bid to fly over eight million more passengers a year has been given the green light by its owner, Luton borough council. It was agreed to by just six members of the council’s 11-strong development control committee at the rescheduled meeting, which ended after eight hours. The scheme includes nearly doubling passenger throughput to 18 million people a year, which could mean 45,000 extra flights per year. It involves extending terminal and car park buildings, constructing a new parallel taxiway and extending aircraft parking aprons. However the approval must now be communicated to the Secretary of State for Local Government Eric Pickles. On November 18th Luton council received a direction, under the Town and Country Planning Management Order 2010 not to grant permission without specific authorisation from him. This direction was issued to enable him to consider whether he should direct that the application be referred to him, under Section 77 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. Councillors at the meeting heard objections from residents and councillors from St Albans, Harpenden, Stevenage, Luton, Hitchin and Flamstead. People are very concerned the expansion would bring an unacceptable increase in noise and air pollution. The airport is proposing 60% more planes and many very late in the evening and very early in the morning.
Click here to view full story...
Campaigners fear democratic deficit as Luton Council decides on expansion application of the airport it owns
A hastily reconvened development control meeting at Luton Borough Council on 20th December decides on the planning application for doubling the capacity of Luton Airport from 9 to 18 million passengers / year. The timing of the meeting, just before Christmas, means many people who wanted to speak at the meeting are unable to attend, which is not democracy working well. An additional democratic problem is that the decision is being made by the Council which owns the airport. The local group, HALE, said “This decision should not be made by airport shareholders – it should be called in for independent scrutiny. It is a hugely unpopular plan: 88% of the respondents are opposed to further expansion, with only 9% in support." A Hertfordshire County Councillor has succeeded in getting an article 25 planning order issued which prevents Luton Council from actually granting planning permission until the Secretary of State decides whether or not to call in the application. The scale of the proposed works are such that the application counts as a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project, based on the extra capacity this would allow, though the airport has tried to claim otherwise. There are serious concerns locally about the noise impact, and therefore health impact, if the expansion is allowed.
Click here to view full story...
Why the Commission’s ‘green light’ for a new runway could still turn out to be a ‘red light’
James Lees, from the Aviation Environment Federation, writing in the Huffington Post, says that while recent days have seen the 3 major parties edge towards a potential about-face on the desirability of a new runway for the south east, the underlying reasons for their opposition to it back in 2010 have not changed. In 2010 David Cameron famously promised "no ifs, no buts, no third runway" at Heathrow; Nick Clegg warned a 3rd runway would be a "disaster", and Ed Miliband threatened to resign from Cabinet over the issue. The reason that politicians came out against a new runway in 2010, reversing a decision in favour of new runways at Heathrow and Stansted, wasn't for a lack of perceived need but down to the power of local opposition. This came from the impact of aircraft noise, its associated health impacts - and also local air pollution and air quality limits. The Airports Commission has so far only paid lip service to the importance of community opposition, mainly addressing only the issues of demand and capacity. The interim report provided no more than vague reassurances to the affected communities. Without satisfactory reassurances from the Commission, communities will look to politicians to provide these. The Airports Commission has failed for now to achieve its purpose to take the politics out of the airports issue. The Interim Report has just re-opened the political debate.
Click here to view full story...
Fears Ifield would be swallowed up if Gatwick builds second runway
With the Airports Commission having made a southern runway at Gatwick one of their options, the people of the villages of Ifield and Langley Green are very concerned about the impact of a very busy full length runway, merely a few hundred metres away. The Ifield Village Association has expressed fears that a runway would destroy Ifield as a pleasant place, and convert it into an area beset by noise and acting just as a service area for an enlarged airport. A 2nd Gatwick runway could lead to there being aircraft flying across the northern tip of Ifield village every few minutes for much of the day. Ifield is already disturbed every few minutes by aircraft climbing out of Gatwick Airport about a mile to the north. If the runway brings huge development and many new jobs, that would mean bringing in workers from other areas - from the UK and from Europe - who would require up to 40,000 new houses. "Crawley already has a housing crisis, new houses would be built on open country in neighbouring authorities. Ifield village could be absorbed into massive new housing estates and lose its access to open country."
Click here to view full story...
It’s ‘Like being on death row’: residents facing devastating impact of Heathrow runway plans
Residents of a historic village that could be obliterated under today’s proposals to expand Heathrow said the plans would have a “devastating” impact on their lives. Some 1,500 buildings would be lost in Harmondsworth and neighbouring Longworth by a north west Heathrow runway - one of the options short-listed by the Airports Commission. People fear the prospect of being as little compensation as the airport can get away with. Residents and business owners in Harmondsworth urged the Government to speed up their decision-making - comparing the impact to “being on death row”. Parts of Harmondsworth are over 1,000 years old and the village contains the Tithe Barn and St Mary’s Church, both places of heritage value. The vicar of St Mary’s Church said: “We lost one-third of our congregation due to the uncertainty over the runway. We used to have 45 on a regular Sunday; it’s come down to 25 or 30, half of whom come from outside the village.” Geraldine Nicholson, who lives in West Drayton just 100m away from one of the proposed runways, said it is not just the villages that would be affected, and 10,000 homes north of the M4 would suffer too - there would be very negative social, as well as environmental, impacts.
Click here to view full story...
Closing stretch of M25 for years, to build new Heathrow runway, is ‘unthinkable’ and a ‘non-starter’
Both locations for a new Heathrow runway, suggested by the Airports Commission, involve building a runway over a particularly wide and busy section of the M25. As the map below shows. The Standard reports that the UK's main motoring organisations are united in horror at the prospect of closing this stretch of the M25 for up to 5 years to build a runway. The plans would mean the six-lane motorway having to be sunk into a tunnel for at least a half-a-mile south of junction 14. In its runway submission to the Commission in July, Heathrow just said the M4/M25 motorway junction requires “major reconfiguration” but did not add further detail. A spokesman for the AA said: “If you thought the protests from residents was bad just wait for the howls from motorists if this goes ahead. They are already stuck in daily traffic jams on this stretch of the M25 and the prospect of something on this scale doesn’t bear thinking about. For the millions of drivers who use the M25 regularly this is a non-starter. The M25 is the artery on which millions of commuters and businesses rely. Any suggestion of large-scale disruption there will cause major backlash.” Another said: "A five year closure borders on the unthinkable. It’s a hugely busy section of motorway where are they going to put all the vehicles?”
Click here to view full story...
Stansted campaigners heave a huge sigh of relief – but it’s not over yet ….
Stop Stansted Expansion (SSE) has expressed huge relief that Stansted has not been short-listed by the Airports Commission as a potential location for an additional runway or runways to meet future aviation demand in the South East. SSE Chairman Peter Sanders said: “This is exactly the outcome that the entire SSE team has been working so hard to achieve all year.... The environmental consequences of even one extra runway would have been catastrophic and there has never been a viable business case for any extra runways at Stansted.” Stansted is currently operating at less than half of its potential capacity. In addition, it has no long haul flights and it primarily caters for outbound leisure travel by UK residents rather than the business market, and low-cost carriers Ryanair and easyJet account for over 90% of its passengers. Unfortunately, the Airports Commission has not completely ruled out an extra runway at Stansted. They have said that its final report in 2015 it will consider whether a 2nd Stansted runway might be a plausible option in the 2040s. “It will therefore be another 2 years before we can even think of letting our guard down."
Click here to view full story...
GACC says they have fought off runway plans in 1970, 1993 and 2003 – and they’ll fight this one too
Responding to the news that a second, southern, runway is on the Airports Commission shortlist for further detailed consideration next year, the local community group GACC (Gatwick Area Conservation Campaign) said the news was no surprise. For the past year GACC has assumed that Gatwick would be included. Now it is clear the so-called ‘wide-spaced’ runway option will be examined – the one that would cause most environmental damage. Brendon Sewill, chairman of GACC, said: ‘Now the battle is for real. The battle lines are drawn. Now the spotlight is on Gatwick the next step will be to examine the runway plans in detail, and it will be found that Gatwick is an unsuitable site. GACC agrees with Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace, RSPB, WWF and other national environmental organisations that any new runway cannot be reconciled with the UK’s obligations under the Climate Change Act. A new runway used to full capacity would cause substantial environmental damage to all the towns and villages for many miles around Gatwick. In addition to the usual issues of noise, pollution and climate change, one of the emerging concerns is that making Gatwick larger than Heathrow would lead to the urbanisation of much of Surrey and Sussex. That will be fiercely opposed. GACC has fought off plans for new runways about every 10 years, in 1970, 1993, and 2003. And GACC say they will do it again this time.
Click here to view full story...
Airports Commission publishes interim report with 2 options for a runway at Heathrow and 1 at Gatwick. Estuary still being considered
The Airports Commission’s interim report has put forward 3 options for a new runway, and have kept their options open on an estuary airport. There would only be one runway, not two and they consider this should be in operation before 2030. At Heathrow the choices are a north west runway, 3,500 metres long, destroying Harmondsworth; and an extension westwards of at least 3,000 metres, of the existing northern runway. They also consider a wide spaced Gatwick runway to the south. The Commission also says "there is likely to be a demand case for a 2nd additional runway to be operational by 2050." They claim this is "consistent with the Committee of Climate Change’s advice to government on meeting its legislated climate change targets." Stansted is ruled out, and on the Thames Estuary they say: "The Commission has not shortlisted any of the Thames Estuary options because there are too many uncertainties and challenges surrounding them at this stage. It will undertake further study of the Isle of Grain option in the first half of 2014 and will reach a view later next year on whether that option offers a credible proposal for consideration alongside the other short-listed options." The report also contains recommendations to the government for immediate action to improve the use of existing runway capacity. Among others, these include better airspace organisation and surface transport improvements such as enhancement of Gatwick station, a rail link from the south to Heathrow, and a rail link between Heathrow and Stansted.