Posts Tagged ‘SAEN’

Airport slow on security move

Thursday, February 4th, 2010

How interesting to see Southend Airport has a plan to improve security at the new terminal.

Soon after the car-bomb attack in June, 2007, at Glasgow Airport, measures were put in place to prevent such attacks at all major airports. Southend has taken almost three years to react.

Your article (Jan 27) demonstrated the confidence felt by airport owners that expansion will go ahead, but fails to mention the anticipated rise in oil prices that will follow the decline of oil production, which could affect the number of planes able to fly from any airport, least of all from a small one like Southend.

Ted Lewin’s proposal to end night flights, made at the developmental control committee, sent councillors and advisers looking for answers from one another. The only answer given was that it would cost the airport money!

Running services all night costs money.

Employing a night security staff would cost less in monetary terms, and would mean thousands of people could sleep all night without interruption.

Finally, will someone explain the “potential investment from the Olympics” mentioned by MP James Duddridge.

Olympians and supporters know London City Airport is nearer the Olympic site, and will spend their money in London. How does that benefit Southend?

Kiti Theobald
Brendon Way
Westcliff

Airport delay

Tuesday, January 26th, 2010

Council agree – but Minister steps in

TWO Leigh Liberal Democrat councillors won a ‘battle’ to delay the airport expansion scheme – but now wait to see if they have won the ‘war’.

Couns Alan Crystall and Peter Wexham both wrote to John Denham, the Communities Secretary of State, along with, it is understood a letter from the campaign group, SAEN – Stop Airport [Extension] Now – and he has said no expansion should commence until he has studied all the papers and decided whether to leave it with Southend Council to decide or order a public inquiry.

In the meantime, though, Southend Council’s development control committee decided last week by 14 votes to three to give their approval to the airport’s expansion scheme application – which includes a 300m extension of the runway to enable it to take passenger jets.

Now the airport, council and objectors wait to see what Mr Denham says.

He has promised to deal with the issue quickly – but all sides are mindful that there is only a three-month ‘window’ for him to announce his decision.

An election is likely on May 6 – but it will be called at least three weeks earlier, and if he has not made his decision by then it could be some months before a new administration gets round to looking at the issue.

In his letter to Southend Council – published in full on page 14 – Mr Denham said because he had received representations against the plan he had asked to see all the papers.

Coun Crystall’s intervention was particularly relevant because he is one of the leading planning spokesmen in the Eastern Region.

Government Minister must approve extension of runway

Wednesday, January 20th, 2010

THE expansion of Southend Airport will not go ahead without the approval of a Government minister, it has been announced.

Even if Southend Council approves the plan to extend the runway across Eastwoodbury Lane, it will still need the go-ahead from Government Minister John Denham.

Mr Denham, Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, will either approve the plan or call it in for a public inquiry.

The council’s development control committee is meeting today to discuss the plans. If the committee refuses the application, the plans are dead. [Not strictly true, as the airport could appeal the decision.]

But if it is approved, the decision is put on hold until the Secretary of State decides he will not intervene or he decides to “call in” the application.

This means there would be a public inquiry about the plan, chaired by a Government planning inspector.

The Secretary of State is not required to reach a decision with any specific timescale, but aims to deal with it “as quickly as possible”.

Anti-expansion pressure group Stop Airport [Extension] Now welcomed the news.

Spokesman Denis Walker said: “The direction means it’s much more likely there will be a public inquiry and that’s good news.

“This is what we’ve been asking for ever since the planning application was submitted.

“Leaving this decision to Southend Council means there wouldn’t be proper scrutiny of it.

“Without a public inquiry, there would be no cross-examination of evidence or full scrutiny in public.

“This major decision would be left entirely in the hands of a process designed to approve extensions to houses.”

Inquiry delay would be ‘frustrating’

THE leader of Southend Council said he is concerned plans to expand the airport could be delayed by the Government’s decision.

Tory leader Nigel Holdcroft said: “There was always the possibility the Government would issue the directive, therefore, it doesn’t come as a great surprise.

“Obviously, the application will still be considered on its merits by the development control team.

“Hopefully, the Secretary of State reviews the situation promptly and decides as quickly as possible to call the matter in if the committee approves it.

“If it’s called in for a public inquiry, it would lead to a significant delay which the airport organisers would find very frustrating.”

Liberal Democrat parliamentary candidate for Southend West, Peter Welch, said he welcomed the Government’s decision.

About John Denham

JOHN Denham is the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government.

Mr Denham, 56, has been Labour MP for Southampton Itchen since 1992 and has been the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government since June.

He recently hit the headlines for claiming class was a more significant factor in 21st-century Britain than race.

Demonstrators oppose runway extension at Southend Airport

Tuesday, January 19th, 2010

PRESS RELEASE

For: 20th January 2010
Demonstrators oppose Southend Airport runway extension

PHOTO OPPORTUNITY
Demonstrators gather on the steps of Southend Civic Centre prior to the afternoon’s Development Control Committee meeting. This meeting will decide whether to approve a planning application to extend the runway at Southend Airport.

When: 10:30am, 20th January 2010
Venue: Southend Civic Centre, Victoria Avenue, Southend-on-Sea
Contact: Denis Walker, Press Officer, Stop Airport Extension Now – denis@saen.org.uk

At 2pm on 20th January, Southend Borough Council’s Development Control Committee will meet to decide whether to grant planning permission for a longer runway at London Southend Airport. Airport owners, Stobart, want the extension to enable growth of the airport to two million passengers per year.

However, on Monday, the Government Office for the East of England issued an Article 14 Direction to Southend Borough Council, requiring them to refer the application to the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, John Denham MP. This Direction prevents the Council from issuing their decision on whether or not to grant planning permission until the Secretary of State has had the opportunity to consider whether the application is one that he should call in for his own determination.

“This is welcome news,” said Denis Walker, Press Officer for SAEN – the campaign group formed to oppose the lengthening of the runway at Southend Airport. “Ever since the planning application was submitted, we have been calling for a Public Inquiry to investigate it properly and this is the first step to getting one.”

“The planning application was submitted part way through the consultation process for a Joint Area Action Plan to determine the future of the airport and its environs. We argue that until this Action Plan is finalised, any decision to extend the runway is premature.”

ENDS.

Notes to Editors

“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.

For further information:

  • Contact Denis Walker, Press Officer SAEN (Stop Airport Extension Now), denis@saen.org.uk
  • Visit the SAEN website – http://saen.org.uk/

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/

Errors in Planning Dept’s handling of the planning application

Monday, January 11th, 2010

The 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, 2010

Hello 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, 2009

This 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

SAEN submits objection to Planning Application

Thursday, December 10th, 2009
SAEN's Objection to the Planning Application

SAEN's Objection to the Planning Application (7MB)

SAEN has today submitted its objection to the planning application to extend the runway at Southend Airport. The report is the culmination of the research done by SAEN to date and was written by members of the SAEN committee.

We would particularly like to thank Roger Wood and the other members of the LADACAN campaign who advised us on some of the aviation technicalities.

We anticipate releasing a new version of the document closer to the time of the Development Control Committee’s meeting as there are other matters of importance that are not currently addressed.

The report is now available for download.

The Church and Eastwoodbury Lane

Sunday, November 29th, 2009

So, 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