The report by Council Officers has now been published and is available on the Southend Council website.
SAEN’s analysis to follow…
Archive for the ‘News’ Category
Planning Dept Report now available
Wednesday, January 13th, 2010Errors in Planning Dept’s handling of the planning application
Monday, January 11th, 2010The following is an edited version of a letter sent to Dean Hermitage of Southend Borough Council Planning Department and Andrew Edwards, a member of the GO East Planning Casework Team. Names of respondents have been removed for publication on the web.
Having viewed the Planning Application comments files this morning we would like to draw a number of worrying errors to your attention. There may well be others that we have not spotted as we didn’t have time to review every single letter. However, we believe that the errors we have found raise serious concerns about the way this planning application has been handled by your department and that the figures you have given for the number of objections and letters of support may well be inaccurate.
In the opinion of the SAEN committee, the issues detailed below seriously call into question Southend Council’s competence in handling this case and we most strongly urge the Government Office for the East of England to call this application in to enable proper scrutiny at a Public Inquiry.
1. The “Null Response” file
We asked for clarification on what “Null Response” means and were told that you had said that it was where a letter didn’t contain a full name and address. The file labelled “Null Response” apparently contained only letters of objection, some of which, granted, did not have an address given, but most of which *did* have a full name and address. The very first letter in that file had a full name and address, so it is difficult to see how this mistake could have been made.
Please explain why this file was labelled as “Null Response” when that is not what it contained.
2. The “No Objection” files
The files we were presented with had post-it notes attached to them which read either “Objection”, “No Objection” or “Null Response”. However, the figures you have given us break the responses down into “Objections”, “Supporting”, “No objections” and “Neutral”. Can you please explain how you decided which category a response fell into where it was not specifically marked as a letter of objection or support and why “Supporting” and “No objections” are mixed in the filing?
3. Null Responses in the “No Objection” files
We found a great many cases where people supporting or “not objecting” to the application did not supply a complete address but their letters were filed in the “No Objection” folders.
[9 names cited]
Why were these not filed in the “Null Response” folder and how can we be sure that they were not counted towards the “No Objection” or “Supporting” totals?
4. Objections filed as Support
We have found a number of specific examples where letters of objection have been filed as letters of support.
[6 names cited]
Some of these started by saying such things as “I support Southend Airport, but I do not support the extension of the runway.” These can therefore only be counted as objections to the planning application, which is specifically concerned with the extension of the runway. I recall Barbara Clark’s letter, which was handwritten, said “LETTER OF OBJECTION” at the top. Why were they filed as letters of support?
5. Double counting
We saw several examples of email messages in the “No Objection” file that had been printed twice and were in different parts of the file. It was obvious that they were the same message as they had the same time stamp and were identical.
[2 names cited]
How do we know that these have not been counted twice? Why were systems not put in place to ensure that duplication of this nature was not possible?
6. Comments from outside the area
I distinctly recall that when handling comments on the Priory Crescent scheme, the Council divided them up into comments from Southend residents and those outside the borough. Has this been done with the comments on this planning application? If so, please supply these figures. If not, why not? It was obvious from looking through the files that a large proportion of the comments of support came from outside the area, with conspicuously large contributions from Warrington and Cumbria. While some letters of objection came from outside the area, it was clearly a smaller proportion.
Given that the Development Control Committee meets on Wednesday next week, you will appreciate that a prompt response is required.
The eleventh hour
Friday, January 8th, 2010Hello Everyone!
Two important things to tell you today; the first is that the Developmental Control Committee meeting is on the 20th January, and not the date that you may have seen in the Yellow Advertiser. This is the meeting at which the Planning Application will be discussed. It is at 2pm and is open to the public. I think it is important that you try to get there, although I appreciate that some of you may be at work. If your office is closed because of weather, please consider wrapping up as warm as you can and making the effort. If you can’t go yourself, ask your friends and neighbours or family to turn out in your place. This decision will affect them as much as at it will you, after all!
The second thing is the attachment with this e-mail; it is a reminder of the fact that you should all have written to John Denham to demand that this whole process is called in. The only fair way to get the process decided is for a Public Inquiry to take place, in public so that all may state their case openly. There would seem to be a strong feeling amongst many that the whole thing is a done deal, and if that suspicion is there it would surely be better if the Council, the Managing Director of the airport and your SAEN representatives could discuss the whole situation in the light of day, with the public able to judge for themselves. There is still time to write. Please do it if you haven’t already, write to David Amess, write to GO-EAST. Sorry to keep banging on, but this is vitally important!
Check the SAEN website for addresses you will need, and when you’ve finished all that, have a happy new year from kiti and the committee!
See you all on the 20th at the Southend Civic Centre!
Latest news from SAEN
Tuesday, December 15th, 2009This could be the last bulletin before Christmas, and you may think that it will be OK to forget about the campaign for just a couple of weeks, but before you do, there are just one or two more things to do.
Let me begin by saying ‘thank you’ to all of you who have been writing to the Councillors, both those on the Developmental Control Committee and your own Councillors. You are doing a marvellous job! If you have been busy and have missed the deadline, please send in your objection NOW before Christmas. It will be accepted right up until the date of the DCC Meeting in late January.
What we would also like you to do now is to continue to press for the whole process to be ‘called in’. This will mean that we will all be able to participate in a Public Inquiry, that the whole process will be examined in detail by experts with experience, that we will be able to put our own case, and that our objections will be listened to in full and taken into consideration. If you write to Andrew Edwards, GO-EAST, Eastbrook, Shaftesbury Road, Cambridge, CB2 8DF, asking for the process to be called in, be sure and express the following concerns:-
- The confusion over Government Policy on regional airport expansion
- The effects of expansion on 70,000 people in terms of noise, etc
- The substantial controversy that the application has given rise to in local press
- The accepted ‘infringement’ of the church on the runway as a hazard
- The presence of several schools beneath the flightpath of a predicted 53,300 flights per annum
We would be allowed to put our objections to the DCC, but only if we could contain it all in a 3-minute speech, and that does sound ridiculous!
If you have already done all that, then may I suggest that your topic for the week, to send one letter by e-mail to all the DCC, is congestion? (Send it to sbc-dcc@saen.org.uk, which is delivered to all the members of the DCC)
It has been said that there are two main roads into Southend, but there is in effect only one route towards the airport from the outskirts of the Borough, as the airport is signposted on to the A127 form Sadler’s Farm roundabout on the A13; besides, no-one in their right mind would use the London Road to get to the airport, as it is so littered with traffic lights that progress is far too slow. So in effect we only have one main A-road to the airport, which is over capacity at peak times. The airport claims that traffic will only increase by 5%, when passenger numbers increase, but at the same time, Southend is expected to build another 6,500 homes as part of the Thames Gateway, and at an average of 2 cars per household, that will be another 13,000 cars clogging up our roads on a daily basis.
So the A127, with its 50mph limit, leads us towards the airport. First stop, Rayleigh Weir, which in spite of the underpass, still regularly grinds traffic to a halt. Then when we get going again, the traffic slows inexorably towards Progress Road. Once again, we are stopped by lengthy queues. A crawl towards Kent Elms, gridlock at the Tesco roundabout, another crawl towards The Bell, and finally we can turn off to the airport! Not far now – oh, then we hit the traffic at Harp House roundabout, queuing to get in to the MacDonald’s bar and the shops on the airport trading estate. Of course, you could also come off at the Tesco Roundabout, duck along Eastwoodbury Lane, (the one that’s due for closure) , and then there’s only two more roundabouts and a set of traffic lights and a barrier to overcome, and you are home and dry!
I somehow doubt that the Council can afford to improve the infrastructure of all these approach problems; they don’t seem to have enough money to resurface the current roads, having spent so much money on putting in bumps to stop us killing each other by driving too fast along the rat-runs!
As you may know, on the 10th December we submitted a 40-page document containing our objections to the Planning Office. We expect to be adding more to it by the time the DCC meet, as there are parts which require a little more research before they are submitted.
Good luck with your letters – in spite of what you may read, we really are doing extremely well with the campaign, and your one or two letters a week will make all the difference in the long run.
If you’ve managed to read this far, thank you! Get writing, people – we are relying on you. Have a happy Christmas holiday -
Kiti Theobald and all the committee
The Church and Eastwoodbury Lane
Sunday, November 29th, 2009So, another week and another topic! If you have not already begun a letter-writing campaign to the officers of the Developmental Control Committee, this may be the topic that gets you started, because to some, it will be the most emotive of all.
In 2002, the CAAG (Church and Airport Action Group) campaign was successful in protecting St Laurence Church from demolition due to the aim to expand the airport and extend the Runway End Safety Area. This current application to extend the runway accepts that the church is still there, and it shows clearly on all the plans as an obstruction. The CAA has yet to venture its opinion on whether it will still be an ‘acceptable obstruction’, but anyone who lives near or passes by the church must wonder why the houses opposite the church have to be demolished, whilst the church is allowed to stay where it is! Perhaps they are hoping that the vibrations from aircraft, warming up their engines next door, or landing heavily mere yards away, will cause the old building to demolish itself, and save the airport having to do it.
So the church will become a very noisy place to worship, at least; it is not a redundant church, but a building of great antiquity, which is used throughout the week by a number of people for a variety of purposes. There is no question of stopping the aeroplanes from using the runway whilst services take place and no question of the parishioners moving somewhere else. The church has stood there for a thousand years, and it is believed to have been a centre of worship even before that. When the airport began as an aerodrome in wartime, the planes had a short take-off and were nowhere near the church at any time; the problem now is the size of the aircraft they want to put there will once again threaten the fabric of the building itself.
Now, supposing that you live to the east of the church and wish to attend services; there is at the moment a short distance to walk, but in the future they envisage, a walk of about a mile will get you to the church.
Which brings me to the last point; what right do these people have to shut off an ancient right of way? You will note that throughout the last few months, they have been using the word ‘diversion’ rather than closure of Eastwoodbury Lane. The village of Eastwood, which has been slowly eroded by Southend Borough Council for years, once stood all around the church, and there were thatched cottages in Eastwoodbury Lane until the second part of the Twentieth Century. One was pulled down because ‘ the doorway was too low’ ! The name itself is indicative of its purpose – it is the way you go in order to bury someone at the church.
So, sorry about the history lesson, much of which you may have known already, but if you have time this week, sbc-dcc@saen.org.uk is the place to send your letters. One letter will reach all 17 of the committee who will decide on the future of the airport. Mine goes off later this evening…
Regards,
Kiti
Share your environmental concerns
Saturday, November 21st, 2009Hello Everyone!
Thank you to those who have contacted us with their ideas and letters to Councillors on Night Flights and Noise. Don’t forget that one e-mail can now be sent to all members of the Developmental Control Committee at one go by sending it to sbc-dcc@saen.org.uk. Thank you.
Now this week I would like us all to concentrate on the environment. It is a huge subject, and no doubt you will have your own ideas about which part of the environment is dearest to your heart!
Just a few ideas from my postbag:-
- The Nottingham Agreement signed up to in June, 2008.
- Climate Change and what Southend Council should be doing about it.
- Noise Pollution by day and night.
- Air Pollution by day and night.
- Local amenities affected by the above.
- Aviation Industry pledge to curb emissions.
- Lack of monitoring for Nitric Oxide, nItrogen Oxide, Sulphur Oxide, Nitrous Oxide and Carbon Monoxide near the airport or contributory roads.
- Stench of aviation fuel.
- 24,000 die each year in Britain as a result of air pollution (Lib-Dem figures)
- Dumping of fuel over Rochford before landing (not confirmed)
Last Thursday, Rochford Council said that there would too much pollution in Rochford if a development of about 260 houses was allowed to go ahead – they then passed a motion allowing 53,300 planes to pass through Southend Airport, right on their doorstep!
That should be enough to get you started! Remember to focus on local issues and by all means send a copy of the letter to your own Councillors to keep them in the picture, if they are not on the Developmental Control Committee. Keep writing – and thanks again.
Kiti
Further information
Rochford Council supports expansion, probably
Thursday, November 19th, 2009Rochford District Council’s Development Control Committee met this evening to consider their response to the planning application to extend the runway at Southend Airport. The planning application has been submitted to Southend Borough Council as the land affected is in their jurisdiction, but Rochford District Council is a consultee as the decision affects residents of Rochford too.
Rochford Council was, it seems, anticipating trouble as there was a police presence at the venue. By the time your correspondent arrived, the meeting hall was already packed and so the remaining members of the public, of which there were over thirty, had to brave the cold and listen to the meeting through a loudspeaker outside the building. A steward providing copies of the documentation estimated that there were 70-100 members of the public present inside the meeting.
From outside the meeting, we were left lacking a number of significant pieces of information, most notably the results of the vote which was conducted by a show of hands only. Members of the public outside the meeting were not given copies of the maps being discussed.
Hopefully, someone who was inside the meeting room can furnish us with more details so that these can be added.
No doubt, minutes of the meeting will be available in due course on the Rochford District Council website.
Whatever happened to the airport meeting?
Wednesday, November 18th, 2009
The deserted departure lounge featuring display boards about the proposed expansion.
Dear Mr Welch,
I was disappointed this evening to find that the Departure Lounge was locked and there was nobody about. A Jennie Johnson of Eastwoodbury Lane had previously issued leaflets advertising a meeting at 7pm today in the Departure Lounge, which we were told would be “An Airport Update by Alistair Welch”.
I since learned from Ms Johnson that she had decided not to attend this evening. However, given that you told us on Friday that you are keen to meet members of the SAEN committee I had hoped you would make yourself available in any case.
It is a shame that you had expressed fear at appearing on the same panel as a knowledgeable expert from AirportWatch, which as we all knew long before the meeting was the real reason for Roger Wood’s invitation being withdrawn. It’s also pretty low to have your PA in the audience, heckling. My personal carbon emissions are hardly relevant to the debate even though I don’t own a car and have never flown.
I look forward to another opportunity to discuss the airport’s proposals with you in public. There is little point in us meeting in private (not that you have ever invited me to do so) as it is far easier to communicate by letter or email, particularly as we then have a record of what we have each said.
Regards,
–
Denis Walker
Press Officer, Stop Airport Extension Now
http://www.saen.org.uk/
The SAEN Song
Wednesday, November 18th, 2009SAEN’s chances of a Christmas number 1 increased infinitely today with the release of our new song, “Call It In”, urging the Government Office for the East of England to call in Stobart’s planning application to extend the runway at Southend Airport.
The call-in process involves the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government ruling that the Local Authority cannot determine the planning application themselves and it must instead be done by the Secretary of State, following a Public Inquiry presided over by an independent Planning Inspector.
(more…)
New Strategy
Saturday, November 14th, 2009Hello to all members and correspondents once again!
The three meetings held in Rochford, Eastwood and Leigh that have been held to inform the public of what is going on and to answer burning questions from all, seem to have gone extremely well. I hope that you were able to attend at least one of them to judge for yourselves!
We continue to try to get the whole process ‘called in’ by the Government, as it is such a huge topic for people more used to making decisions on much, much smaller planning issues, but we are going to ask you to contact all the Councillors who are involved in the Planning Process so that they, too, can be as well-informed as you are. There is a list of all these people below this letter.
There are so many concerns that it would be a daunting exercise to address them all at once, not only for you, the writer, but also for the Councillor who will read your letters.
The plan is to take 2 or 3 issues at a time and filter them in gradually over the next few weeks. If we are consistent in this approach, we can make a real difference to their knowledge and the process itself.
If you are able to make free phone calls, that would be good, because you can use the opportunity to discuss with the councillors over the phone. If you would rather e-mail, then please do so, and if you would rather write, the addresses of all the developmental control officers are here also; just make contact in some way!
Most correspondents have identified noise and night flights as problems which concern them most, so let’s target them first. All the arguments you need will already be on the web site, and I am sure that you will be able to personalise them to your own specifications. Just concentrate on those two issues for now and contact as many of the Councillors on the list as you can. Concerted effort won’t be wasted effort, I can assure you, and you have been a brilliant team to work with this far. Keep it up, folks!
Kiti and Committee
