Archive for January 14th, 2010

Noise is protesters’ main concern

Thursday, January 14th, 2010

NOISE is the biggest concern among objectors with all but a handful of the 1,400 responses citing it as a worry.

It relates mainly to flights, particularly at night, and a big increase in traffic.

The airport says the extension of the runway would mean larger but quieter, more modern aircraft and approximately three-quarters of aircraft would arrive at the Rochford end over largely undeveloped land, with the rest over Leigh.

The results of a noise assessment submitted by the applicant conclude that there would only be a three decibel increase as a result of the planned new flights[, revealing that what they say about the larger aircraft being quieter is untrue].

Southend Airport has put forward a number of proposed measured to placate residents, including fines if limits are exceeded, a limit on night flights [with exclusions for quota count exempt aircraft], no night helicopter flights, and a grant scheme to provide noise insulation for nearby homes, schools and healthcare buildings.

The report says more properties would fall within the public safety zones of ‘tolerable’ risk, including Blenheim School.

This means that future extensions to the school building for the purposes of increasing pupil capacity would be capped.

Is runway approval a foregone conclusion at Southend Airport?

Thursday, January 14th, 2010

As soon as Stobart submitted their planning application to extend the runway at London Southend Airport, some people said that the outcome was a foregone conclusion. They could be accused of being cynical, but the evidence is now mounting that they were right.

Firstly, there is the evidence of the second phase of Joint Area Action Plan (JAAP) consultation, which ignored the majority of respondents to Phase 1 and nominated the least popular proposal as the Councils’ preferred option.[1] The full analysis of the Phase 2 consultation will not be published until after the Development Control Committee have made their decision. Were it not for SAEN’s[2] Freedom of Information request, which was only granted on appeal to the Information Commissioner, not even the raw numbers of objectors and supporters would be available[3] and yet they show that well over three quarters of respondents opposed the runway extension.

Then there is the evidence of the shambolic state of the planning application file where legitimate objections were being discounted for no discernible reason, objections and invalid responses were being counted as support and supporting comments were being counted twice.[4] There was even one example where a respondent had supplied nothing more than their name and address and was counted as supporting the application.

We now also have the evidence of the Officers’ Report[5], published on 13th January, which recommends that the planning application be approved – in many cases solely on the evidence of the Airport owners with no independent analysis. The report is biased in its analysis of the comments received. It says that “strong support has been shown by a number of local employers” and names seven examples, six of which are in the aviation industry. No details are provided about companies that objected to the planning application.

The Officers’ Report refers to “The Planning System – General Principles”[6] which “advises that unless the proposed development is so significant it would prejudice [a Development Plan Document, such as the JAAP] a refusal on prematurity grounds should not be necessary.”[7] However, the extension of the runway at Southend Airport is the central tenet of the proposals detailed in Phase 2 of the JAAP consultation. A decision to approve the planning application would therefore prejudice the JAAP. This means that the planning application must be rejected to allow the JAAP process to run its course. The Report acknowledges that the development under consideration in the planning application is “significant”[8] then immediately goes on to dismiss it as “only one aspect of the development of the airport…” and proceeds to advise Councillors that “It is not considered the proposal should be refused on grounds of prematurity.”[9]

The Development Control Committee meets to decide the planning application at 2pm on Wednesday 20th January at Southend Civic Centre.

ENDS.

Notes for Editors

[1] “Despite some support, the majority of respondents were opposed to Scenario 3. There was significant opposition to Scenario 3, particularly, but not exclusively, from members of the public.” – Analysis of responses to Phase 1 of JAAP Consultation, page 15: http://www.rochford.gov.uk/PDF/JAAP_%20issues_and_options_summary_consultation_response.pdf

[2] “Stop Airport Extension Now” (SAEN) was formed to campaign against the runway extension at Southend Airport. The group is not opposed to the Airport itself, which has co-existed with the residents of Southend for many years. SAEN is against the runway extension, which would lead to a massive increase in flights and destroy the lives of the people living, working or going to school anywhere near the flightpath.

[3] http://www.rochford.gov.uk/pdf/JAAP_representations_summary.pdf

[4] SAEN’s concerns have been outlined in a letter to the Council at http://www.saen.org.uk/2010/01/errors-in-planning-depts-handling-of-the-planning-application/ For privacy, the letter has been edited to remove the names of respondents. The planning application (ref 09/01960/FULM) comments files are available to view at Southend Borough Council by appointment. Call the Southend Borough Council Planning Department for an appointment on 01702 215328

[5] http://minutes.southend.gov.uk/akssouthend/images/att16846.doc

[6] http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/planningandbuilding/pdf/147396.pdf

[7] Point 4.1.35 of [4]

[8] Point 4.1.36 of [4]

[9] Point 4.1.37 of [4]

For further information:

* Call Denis Walker, Press Officer, SAEN (Stop Airport Extension Now)
* Visit the SAEN website – http://saen.org.uk/