Posts Tagged ‘SAEN’

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

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

Tags:
Posted in News | No Comments »

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.

Tags:
Posted in Planning Application | No Comments »

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

Tags: , , ,
Posted in News | No Comments »

Computer glitch leaves Council with Egg on Face

Wednesday, November 25th, 2009

The planning application submitted by the Stobart Group to extend the runway at Southend Airport originally had a deadline of 12th November for objections. However, this was extended to 20th November. In recent days, the deadline published on the Council’s website changed again, firstly to 1st December and now to 10th.

Dean Hermitage, the Planning Officer in charge of this particular project, was completely unaware of the changes and expressed some exasperation that the Council’s computer system seems to change the deadline of its own volition. However, he commented, “Since our website now displays the 10th December deadline, we will obviously have to honour that. It does make it a bit difficult taking all those comments into account in time for the Development Control Committee of 20th January.

“However, we will accept comments right up to the DCC Committee meeting.”

Kiti Theobald, chairman of Stop Airport Extension Now, responded: “One wonders how much attention will be given to comments submitted ‘right up to’ 20th January if the Council are worried that 10th December is cutting it fine.

“We encourage people to get their objections in before the 10th December deadline, but they should also write to the Government Office for the East of England asking for the application to be called in for a Public Inquiry. Details are available on our website at http://saen.org.uk/”

ENDS

Notes to Editors:

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.

Website: http://saen.org.uk/

Tags: ,
Posted in Planning Application, Press Releases | No Comments »

Why the planning application needs calling in

Tuesday, November 24th, 2009
SAEN
PO Box 5909
Southend-on-Sea MLO
Short St
Southend-on-Sea
SS1 1AA

http://www.saen.org.uk
committee@saen.org.uk

Stop Airport Extension Now

Your ref: SW2411
Our ref: 20091124-DAMP

24 November, 2009

David Amess MP
House of Commons
London
SW1A 0AA

Dear David,

Thank you for forwarding me Paul Clark’s response in your letter of 18th November.

We are aware that the Secretary of State is generally reluctant to call planning applications in but believe that in this case it is desirable. The planning application to extend the runway does indeed involve issues beyond local importance in addition to meeting a number of the other criteria for call-in:

  • conflict with national policies on important matters
    The expansion of Southend Airport to 2mppa is not supported by the Air Transport White Paper of 2003. The ATWP envisages a role for the airport supporting the needs of local businesses. No runway extension would be required for this.
    The expansion of any airport conflicts with the Climate Change Act as it would result in an increase in CO2 emissions. The extension of the runway at Southend Airport enables this. As you will be aware, the Government’s policy on aviation is entirely at odds with the overriding requirement to save the planet from devastating global warming.
  • could have significant effects beyond the immediate locality
    Clearly, climatic impacts would satisfy this. However, the inadequacy of the road infrastructure to cope with an increase in traffic as a result of the airport expansion would also have effects beyond the immediate locality. The airport expects a 5% increase in traffic on roads that are already at or near capacity.
  • give rise to substantial regional or national controversy
    As you will be aware from your mailbag, this topic is very controversial locally. There is also substantial concern nationally about airport expansion.
  • raise significant architectural and urban design issues
    Southend is the fifth most densely populated area in the UK outside London. There are about 20,000 houses and ten schools under or near enough to the flight path to be affected by the increase in noise the airport expansion would cause. The Council themselves acknowledge that the airport is not in the right place, so logically, expansion would be inappropriate for the area.
  • involve the interests of national security or of foreign governments
    Airports are quite obviously intrinsically linked with national security.

It should be noted that any one of the reasons in bold is sufficient justification for call-in.

I would now like to turn to the Joint Area Action Plan (JAAP). Mr Clark should be made aware of the overwhelming opposition shown in both phases of JAAP consultation conducted so far.

The Councils noted in their report on the first phase of consultation that “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.” One would expect, particularly given that they go on to spell out a number of those objections, that the second phase of consultation would not then select Scenario 3 as the Preferred Option that the Councils wished to pursue and yet they did. The full document is available at:

http://www.rochford.gov.uk/PDF/JAAP_%20issues_and_options_summary_consultation_response.pdf

Unfortunately, there is at the present time no similar document for phase 2 of consultation, but we know from the ‘Brief Summary of Representations’ at:

http://www.rochford.gov.uk/pdf/JAAP_representations_summary.pdf

that over three quarters of respondents opposed the runway extension specifically, and there was an even higher level of opposition to the JAAP Preferred Options as a whole.

By suspending the JAAP, the most contentious issue in it – the extension of the runway and the expansion of the airport more generally – will no longer form part of the JAAP when it finally resumes. This means that we will be denied the opportunity of a Public Examination of this issue, whether or not a Public Inquiry is called to examine the planning application.

We have been in touch with the Government Office for the East of England and are aware that they are monitoring the situation. Our minds would be put more at ease if GO East were to issue an Article 14 direction letter preventing Southend Council deciding the application.

Thank you for your continued assistance.

Yours sincerely,

Kiti Theobald
Chairman, SAEN

Tags: , ,
Posted in Letters, Planning Application | No Comments »

Re: Prejudging the JAAP?

Thursday, November 19th, 2009

Nigel,

Thank you for your reply. I will address your comments inline for ease of reference.

On 19 Nov 2009, at 08:25, CllrHoldcroft wrote:

Denis

I refer to your e mail.

Frankly I am not convinced that the meeting was particularly helpful in clarifying the debate. Obviously many of the attendees had pretty fixed views either one way or the other and the format did not allow a great deal of clarification on the issues of concern. However in my experience this is not unusual with a meeting of this kind.

Leaving aside for a moment the particular format chosen, a public meeting of any type will clearly be more informative than no meeting at all. As Southend Borough Council has so far held no public meetings to discuss the airport’s expansion proposals, we can only judge on the meetings held by Leigh Town Council.

If you believe a better format could be adopted, then I urge you to call such a meeting at the earliest opportunity.

I get the sense that SBC has essentially adopted the position of Renaissance Southend in supporting the airport for economic reasons. While you will appreciate that based on my current understanding I dispute those reasons, I would very much appreciate the opportunity to attend a meeting at which the Council explained its position and the reasoning behind it. I am sure that most SAEN supporters would agree with me.

I am unsure why you suggest that the DC meeting has been moved. At present it is my understanding that we continue to work towards a meeting on 20th January.

The “Target Determination Date” is now 1st February on the “Important Dates” page of the planning application. Previously, it was 11th January. This is the only information I have to go on. If the Target Determination Date is not the date intended for the DCC meeting, I don’t know where I would be able to obtain that information.

What has most definitely changed, however, is the “Expiry Date for Standard Consultations”, which was until very recently 20th November. It is now 1st December and as I said in my previous email, could you tell me please the reason for this change?

I am not prepared to trawl through back issues of the Echo and accordingly am not able to confirm the accuracy or otherwise of comments previously attributed to me. All I would make clear is that at all times during this process I have commented on the basis of the advice being received and believing my comments to be accurate.

I wasn’t expecting you to “trawl through back issues of the Echo”. This is why I provided the links to the articles in question on the Echo’s website. As you have not addressed these issues, I will ask again.

You told us in June that:

“NO decisions will be made about the airport expansion, until the results of the joint area action plan are known”

You will find this quote at http://www.echo-news.co.uk/news/local_news/southend/4452482.Airport_plan__Demolish_church_wall_and_cottages/

Your statement is clear. I have no reason to doubt that you said this and it is a very sensible thing to say. However, we now find ourselves in the situation that the results of the JAAP are not known and a decision is to be made about the airport expansion by Southend Borough Council’s Development Control Committee.

As I am sure you have been aware from the outset, a relevant planning application could come in at any time during the JAAP process. Surely the Council had planned for this contingency? If not, why not? Did they expect Stobart to be honourable and wait for the JAAP process to conclude? You only have to look at the way they have behaved towards Carlisle City Council regarding their other airport to know that this is not something you can expect of them.

Taking the runway extension and associated alterations out of the JAAP makes it essentially meaningless, as I am sure you appreciate. Broadly speaking, the only element of the plan left is the so-called “Saxon Business Park”, which while in my opinion is ill-advised, would clearly not bring the devastating effects to the town that the runway extension and associated airport expansion would.

Regarding your second quote in September from the article at http://www.echo-news.co.uk/news/local_news/4638219.Runway_plan_imminent_for_Southend_Airport/ :

“Since there has already been a preliminary inquiry, then I would expect an application to be coming forward soon.

“Inevitably, whatever the decision made by the development control committee, the application will have to go to a public inquiry.”

I am still unclear as to what “preliminary inquiry” you were referring to and seek clarification on the application *having* to go to a public inquiry.

With regard to the information requested in your final paragraph pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act, I would suggest that you submit this request to John Williams Head of Legal and Democratic Services at the Council. It is the Council that is a public authority which is subject to the Act – not individual councillors. I understand that SAEN has already made a number of FOI requests for information to Mr Williams, so you will have the contact details

I have done this, although it took ten minutes to locate John Williams’ email address – I eventually found it in an email from Amanda Barness. As his address is simply johnwilliams@southend.gov.uk you could have just said that rather than writing a whole sentence about me already having his contact details.

I look forward to your reply to the issues raised above. I should point out that I am writing not merely for my own benefit but in order to inform the SAEN membership and the wider public of Southend on the Council’s position.

Regards,

–
Denis Walker
Press Officer, Stop Airport Extension Now

http://www.saen.org.uk/

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Letters | No Comments »

RE: Prejudging the JAAP?

Thursday, November 19th, 2009

Denis

I refer to your e mail.

Frankly I am not convinced that the meeting was particularly helpful in clarifying the debate. Obviously many of the attendees had pretty fixed views either one way or the other and the format did not allow a great deal of clarification on the issues of concern. However in my experience this is not unusual with a meeting of this kind.

I am unsure why you suggest that the DC meeting has been moved. At present it is my understanding that we continue to work towards a meeting on 20th January.

I am not prepared to trawl through back issues of the Echo and accordingly am not able to confirm the accuracy or otherwise of comments previously attributed to me. All I would make clear is that at all times during this process I have commented on the basis of the advice being received and believing my comments to be accurate.

With regard to the information requested in your final paragraph pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act, I would suggest that you submit this request to John Williams Head of Legal and Democratic Services at the Council. It is the Council that is a public authority which is subject to the Act – not individual councillors. I understand that SAEN has already made a number of FOI requests for information to Mr Williams, so you will have the contact details

Nigel Holdcroft

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

RE: This evening’s meeting

Thursday, November 19th, 2009

Denis – Thank you for your note.

I feel the tone of the note simply reinforces the benefit that we would both
gain from sitting down and discussing your concerns. I have written to your
Chairman on a number of occasions inviting her to meet with me – for the
avoidance of doubt – there is an open invitation for you to sit down and
meet with me to discuss your concerns – you have my contact details.

An illustration of the reason it may be helpful to sit down – on Friday you
were reading Boeing data suggesting the A319 was louder than the 146. What
you did not mention (although your website has highlighted it on a number of
occasions in the past) is that the 319 is payload restricted on take off
with 1800m distance – ie it cannot reach the USA etc. The noise at max
takeoff from Southend (with a longer runway)is less than the A319 at max
take off weight for Southend. If it would be helpful, I would be happy to
sit down and run through this.

I don’t think it would be helpful to run through the rest of your note -
Suffice it to say you are wrong on the meeting item, wrong on the
airportwatch representative, wrong that my PA was even there etc etc.

I could counter with on buzzword bingo – but my aim is for a constructive
dialogue based on fact and I have no wish to make this trivial.

As I say – open invitation to you to meet with me.

Regards, Alastair.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Letters | No Comments »

Whatever happened to the airport meeting?

Wednesday, November 18th, 2009

The deserted departure lounge

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/

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Meetings, News | No Comments »

Prejudging the JAAP?

Wednesday, November 18th, 2009

Dear Nigel,

It was good to have an opportunity to share a platform with you on Friday evening at the Leigh Town Council public meeting and I hope you will agree that such meetings are very helpful to the public in terms of getting at the facts behind the spin presented by the airport. It would be good if Southend Borough Council were to host a few such events prior to the Development Control Committee’s meeting, which I note has now been moved to February.

The extension of the “Standard Consultations” deadline to 1st December is a welcome move and I would be interested to hear the reason for this change.

My main reason for writing is to check the veracity of some statements attributed to you in the Echo as they appear to be at odds with the situation we currently find ourselves in.

In the Echo of 23rd June we have:
—
NO decisions will be made about the airport expansion, until the results of the joint area action plan are known, council leader Nigel Holdcroft has said.
…
“You could suggest the airport is anxious to keep the pressure on the council to make some decision on its proposals. However, we have not yet fully analysed the results of the Joint Area Action Plan consultation which has put forward options for the airport’s future.

“It is an extremely complex issue and we cannot take a decision quickly without looking closely at all the issues involved.”
—
http://www.echo-news.co.uk/news/local_news/southend/4452482.Airport_plan__Demolish_church_wall_and_cottages/

Clearly the results of the JAAP are a long way off as the process has been suspended while a planning application to extend the runway is dealt with. This planning application will determine the most significant and controversial element of the JAAP without even the full report into the second phase of consultation being published, which as we know from SAEN’s Freedom of Information battle with Rochford Council will show that over three quarters of respondents object to both the runway extension and the JAAP as a whole.

Are we to take it from your June statement that the Development Control Committee is to defer its decision on the planning application until after the JAAP process has been concluded? If not, an explanation for this change of policy is required.

You also state in the Echo on 21st September:
—
“Since there has already been a preliminary inquiry, then I would expect an application to be coming forward soon.

“Inevitably, whatever the decision made by the development control committee, the application will have to go to a public inquiry.”
—
http://www.echo-news.co.uk/news/local_news/4638219.Runway_plan_imminent_for_Southend_Airport/

Could you explain what “preliminary inquiry” you were referring to in your statement above?

Clearly you were expecting the planning application to be submitted prior to the conclusion of the JAAP at this point. Given that the JAAP process involves an Examination in Public presided over by an independent Planning Inspector, surely this rigorous testing of the JAAP as a whole would be desirable prior to the determination of individual elements of the Plan (i.e. the runway extension).

While we’re on the subject of prior determination, I note that Rob Tinlin raises this as a potential problem in an email in early October, before the planning application had been submitted. How is it that the suspension of the JAAP avoids this issue given that the Preferred Options document makes it quite clear that both Southend and Rochford Councils support the extension of the runway at Southend Airport. Clearly this is a major element of the JAAP and would feature in the final document to be examined in public before being submitted to the Secretary of State. By taking this element out of the JAAP, the people of Southend and Rochford (and any other interested parties) are being deprived of an opportunity to examine these proposals in detail at the planning policy stage.

As he told the public on Friday, Cllr Alan Crystall will not be able to take part in the Development Control Committee meeting examining the airport’s planning application. Are any other DCC members currently barred from taking part? I have heard that some are. I know, for example, that Cllr Gwen Horrigan has shown clear support for the runway extension at public meetings in the recent past. Are barred members replaced by other Councillors or are their seats left empty? As these are procedural matters on which you will hold records, I should point out that the requests in this paragraph are made under the Freedom of Information Act and I look forward to your response within 20 working days.

Regards,

–
Denis Walker
Press Officer, Stop Airport Extension Now

http://www.saen.org.uk/

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Letters | No Comments »

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »