Posts Tagged ‘Leigh Town Council’

Leigh Town Council votes to object to Southend airport runway extension

Wednesday, November 18th, 2009

Leigh Town Council’s planning committee has voted to submit an objection to plans to extend the runway at Southend airport.

At a meeting last night, Tuesday, councillors decided to object to the plans for a variety of reasons.

Although the planning application submitted to Southend Council by airport owners the Stobart Group does not directly affect Leigh, the town is under the airport flight path.

Residents have expressed concerns about the development including increased noise, pollution and disruption to school pupils, which the council is now set to include in its objection.

Tags:
Posted in Echo, Media | No Comments »

Hundreds pack Leigh hall for Southend Airport meeting

Tuesday, November 17th, 2009

HUNDREDS of worried residents voiced their concern about the expansion plans at Southend Airport.

The plans, by owners the Eddie Stobart group, would see more planes landing at the airport and the runway extended across Eastwoodbury Lane.

Many residents have expressed concerns about a massive increase in freight and cargo flights, but Alastair Welch, airport managing director, said this would not be the case.

Speaking to the 215 people at the meeting in the Leigh Community Centre, he said: “We have an organisation that is committed to investing in the airport and the business plan we have is very driven by passenger numbers.

“It is not cargo. It is not freight. It is not trucks and it never will be.”

Families also raised concerns about night flights and Blenheim Primary School, being affected by air and noise pollution from the airport.

But Mr Welch said the runway extension would mean take offs and landings would be more gradual, using less fuel and they would be quieter.

Last month, Southend Council leader Nigel Holdcroft revealed new measures put in place to limit night flights in a bid to allay fears.

Leigh councillor Alan Crystall also attended the meeting, thereby forfeiting his right to take part in planning meetings about the expansion.

Mr Crystall said he had done it to make make his view clear.

He said: “I want to publicly oppose the proposal to extend the airport runway.”

The panel at the meeting consisted of Mr Welch, planning consultant Rob Matthews, council leader Nigel Holdcroft, Southend Council’s corporate director for tourism Andrew Lewis and Denis Walker press officer for the campaign group Stop Airport Extension Now.

Rochford District Council’s development control committee will not have a say in the design of the new control tower at Southend Airport.

The tower is automatically permitted under Government regulations and there is no limit on the size of such buildings.

Tags:
Posted in Echo, Media | No Comments »

Airport given a hard time at Leigh meeting

Friday, November 13th, 2009
LTC Public Meeting, 13th Nov 2009

LTC Public Meeting, 13th Nov 2009

Leigh Town Council held a meeting this evening to give the public an opportunity to find out more about the airport’s expansion plans and what impact they would have particularly for people living under the flight path in Leigh. Around 180 people attended.

The panel was made up of Rob Matthews and Alistair Welch of Southend Airport, Nigel Holdcroft and Andy Lewis of Southend Borough Council and Denis Walker of SAEN and South East Essex Friends of the Earth.

Roger Wood, a campaigner from LADACAN (the Luton Airport equivalent of SAEN) and the Aviation Environment Federation had accepted an invitation to appear on the panel two days previously, but his invitation was withdrawn a few hours later by Leigh Town Council on the basis that he didn’t live in Leigh.

The airport revealed that during that afternoon, they had concluded negotiations with Network Rail and National Express to build their proposed station at a cost of around £12m. No other new information was forthcoming from them.

David Amess, MP for Southend West was unable to attend the meeting but presented his apologies and a statement in which he asked for the audience to vote on whether they wanted the decision to go to a Public Inquiry. However, there was confusion among the panellists (including those from Southend Borough Council) as to whether it was necessary to call the planning application in before or after the decision was made. Mr Amess’s statement made specific reference to calling the application in after it had been decided by Southend Council’s Development Control Committee and it is possible that he was only talking in terms of an appeal if planning permission was refused. We will investigate this matter further and keep you informed. Update: We now have a copy of Mr Amess’s statement. Analysis to follow shortly.

Towards the end of the meeting Cllr Alan Crystall, a member of Southend Council’s Development Control Committee (DCC), stood up and gave his view that the runway should not be extended. This would have barred him from taking part in the DCC’s decision were it not for the fact that he had already been barred for making comments opposing the expansion previously. He brought up the matter of the Government’s lack of support for expansion to 2 million passengers per year, which was then challenged by Alistair Welch, whose documentation indicates support from the Government.

However, Denis Walker then read out the following statement made by the East of England Regional Assembly in their response to Phase 2 of the JAAP:

The JAAP does include the support and identified role of the airport contained in the 2003 Air Transport White Paper (ATWP). However, contrary to JAAP policy LS1, neither the ATWP nor the East of England Plan identifies growth at London Southend of up to two million passengers per annum (mppa). The two mppa figure was an assumption used in the demand and impact appraisal work and was based on the maximum use of the runways at the major airports and no new runway capacity.

Given that the ATWP supported new runways at Stansted and Heathrow, the role for Southend that is supported was not for two mppa, but to meet local demand and the needs of business aviation. This is reflected in policy E7 and paragraph 4.31 of the East of England Plan.

This is just one example of the numerous factual inaccuracies to be found in the Airport’s planning application and we will share others as they come to light.

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted in Meetings | 1 Comment »

Leigh Town Council: Statement to Airport meeting

Wednesday, May 6th, 2009

The following has been provided by Geoff Fulford of Leigh Town Council and is a summary of what he said at the meeting at Leigh Community Centre on 6th May.

Southend Airport JAAP
Statement to Airport meeting – 6th May 2009

  1. Leigh-on-Sea Town Council started with the Issues and Options consultation in June 2008.
    1. We invited Mr. Alastair Welch, Managing Director of Southend Airport and Mr. Mark Murphy from Southend Borough Council to address our Council’s Planning Committee, which they did.
    2. The Town Council considered the 4 options:
      1. Low Growth
      2. Medium Growth
      3. Medium Growth – Aviation Cluster
      4. High Growth
    3. These options were looked at on the following bases:
      1. Employment needs and supply, including requirements under the East of England Plan
      2. Housing needs and supply, including requirements under the East of England Plan
      3. Transport & Accessibility, private transport, trains and buses, particularly how the existing or proposed road structure could deal with increased traffic to meet the various options
      4. The environment impacts, particularly on the Green Belt, natural habitats and biodiversity and how they would be affected by the various options
      5. Recreational facilities
    4. We also considered the strategic role of the airport within Southend, Rochford and South Essex
    5. The various factors were all considered very carefully, and the Town Council opted for Option 1, Low Growth, and responded on that basis.
  2. Subsequently, we were notified of the Preferred Options consultation in February 2009.The Preferred Option from Rochford and Southend Councils was for high growth. It is, therefore, no surprise that the Town Council opposes many of the proposals in the Preferred Options document.

    The Town Council’s response is:

    1. That the runway should not be extended. This would be unnecessary under the Town Council’s preference for airport development, and would create noise and disturbance to residential areas in Leigh and in other places
    2. The passenger levels should not go up to 2 million per year, but have limited growth from the current 30,000 per year because of the impact on residential amenity, transport infrastructure and environment.
    3. That the airport should not be a driver for the local economy, it should, rather, have economic growth as a consequence of any growth, and that growth should be restricted to Maintenance, Repair and Overhaul of aeroplanes.
    4. To oppose high scale employment growth at the airport
      Particularly 99,000 sq met in the Saxon Business Park and 10,000 sq met on Nestuda Way, purportedly creating 5,450 jobs. The Town Council preferred 15,000 sq met increase and an increase of 620 new jobs. There was no evidence given or justification for the employment figures, nor how the jobs would be provided and their impact on transport, the environment and other social issues.
    5. The Town Council wanted clarification or specification of night flying. Policy TF1 includes restrictions of scheduled passenger flights from 6.30 a.m. to 11.00 p.m., but does not mention any restrictions on night flying of cargo aircraft. Although the consultation document says that ‘the airport will be used primarily for passengers’, we all know what Mr. Stobart’s business is based on, and there is no reference to restrictions on freight flights.
    6. In relation to travel, no details are given. There is a general statement improvement to the A127, integrating proposals to improve the functioning of the wider network and encouraging a modal shift. The Town Council would need specific action, such as:
      1. Special trains from London to the new Airport Railway Station (although this would create problems on sections of the line where there are no overtaking opportunities for the faster trains)
      2. A travel plan for airport staff and businesses.
      3. Park and Ride schemes to get passengers to the airport.
      4. High parking fees at the airport
      5. Improved local bus services
    7. The Town Council fundamentally opposes some of the proposed land use changes:
      1. Area iia, to the north of Aviation Way Business Park, currently primarily agricultural land and proposed for offices and light industry should not be changed
      2. Area iid currently playing pitches to the south of the Brickworks and proposed for offices and light industry should not be changed.
      3. Area xi, currently football pitches and agriculture south of Nestuda Way, proposed for a park and ride facility should not be changed.In relation to areas to the north of Aviation Way and the south of the Brickworks, the proposals would have a very negative impact on the environment and the amenity of the area.In relation to the land south of Nestuda Way, the proposals would again harm the environment, and a Park and Ride facility in this location would not benefit Southend because of the transport difficulties that there would be in getting to this location.
  3. Other Issues and Policy changes if the High Growth Option is chosen
    1. Policy E1 referring to a 50/50 split of employment between Rochford and Southend, the Town Council believes this is a guess to appease political imperatives of apparent fairness without any justification within the plan.
    2. Policy LS7 should state clearly that cargo flights have the same restrictive times as passenger flights and an ‘agreed noise quota’ should be specified. Residents under a flight path are not concerned whether a flight is for passengers or cargo
    3. The Preferred Options document does not mention ‘a quality hotel’, or a new control tower, both of which were in the Options and Issues document. What is happening in respect of these?
    4. There is a tendency within the document to be non-specific about numbers, make assumptions and to use ‘planning language’. This could be the way that the minds work of the people who write the document, or there could be more subtle reasons. We have referred earlier to agreed noise quotas, no stated restrictions on cargo flight times, integrating proposals to improve the functioning of the wider network and encouraging a modal shift. (We know what this means, but there is no indication of how it will be achieved). Expressions such as:
      1. to ‘provide internal solutions to movement and accessibility’ we don’t know what this means.
      2. ‘It is expected that the layout will include a number of eco-friendly business start-up units’ What is the basis for making this kind of statement?
      3. ‘considering controls on airport operations to ensure quality of life is maintained’ These controls should be imposed, not considered

      do not add to our understanding, or that of the public to what is being proposed.

Conclusion

There appears to be a split between those who favour the positive economic benefits of expanding the airport and those who favour the positive environmental benefits of restricting growth.

The Town Council considered both very seriously, and recognise the inherent dichotomy. After a long and well-argued debate, the Town Council finally came down on the side of low growth for environmental reasons, particularly in relation to noise, pollution and transport difficulties.

Tags: , ,
Posted in Local Government, Meetings | No Comments »