Posts Tagged ‘Southend Borough Council’

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

I’ll not be brainwashed over airport decision

Monday, January 4th, 2010

I object to being called a “stooge” by Mike Hansford (Dec 18).

I am one of the 17 members of Southend Council’s development control committee who will make a decision on the airport.

My decision will be made on the planning application and the data submitted with it. I will consider this alongside the various planning control policies and guidance documents that Southend Council has.

I will, of course, take into consideration the many emails, letters and phone calls that I have received from both objectors and supporters of this application.

My answer to these people has been the same – I have noted their views, but am unable to comment as to my own persuasion.

The training I have received over the years is from external agencies as well as internal.

There is no brainwashing.

I will make my own decision based on facts.

It is a pity that, although Mr Hansford is entitled to his opinion, it would be better to be based on facts, not ignorance.

Mike Grimwade
Councillor, Prittlewell Ward
Eastwood Old Road

Tags: , ,
Posted in Echo, Letters, Local Government, Media | 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 »

Share your environmental concerns

Saturday, November 21st, 2009

Hello 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

Tags: , ,
Posted in News | 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 »

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 »

Night flights and noise

Monday, November 16th, 2009

Dear Councillor,

I am writing to you as a member of the Development Control Committee with my thoughts on two topics; night flights and noise from aircraft.

The current limit on night flights is 915 per month, and we are told that IF the extension is allowed to go ahead the figure will drop to 120 per month. This figure does not mention what type of aircraft we can expect to hear, whether they will be in a regular pattern, or whether aircraft which register below a certain number of decibels will be included in this number or simply added to it. Also, when London City Airport is closed for fog, or from sheer weight of numbers of flights, Southend airport will be used, will the airport have to say “Sorry, we have used out Quota – go and land somewhere else!” or will we in fact have more than the quota landing here?

It seems also as if the Airport and Stobart want to sound as if they are doing us a favour by ‘reducing’ the number to 120 when that is far more than are currently flying at night!

Southampton Airport has 10 night flights each month, and London City none at all as far as I can ascertain. If we are to model ourselves on Southampton, why should we not have the same controls as they have, and if London City doesn’t need night flights because there are already plenty of night flights operating from Heathrow and Stansted to cater for people from this area, via the excellent X30 coach service, then why should be having night flights at all.

Furthermore, if people are not travelling at night, then the flights will either be for Maintenance and repair or for cargo. Since we have Mr A Welch’s word that the Stobart Company is not interested in extending their cargo base here, then that only leaves maintenance planes which surely are able to fly in during daylight hours, so I repeat, why 120 night flights per month?

Remember, your decision will not only affect those living under the flight path in Leigh and Southend, but those in Rochford as well, since there is a move to direct as many flights as possible in the other direction to the one generally used at present.

My second point is the noise from aircraft during the day. At present, this is fairly low-key compared to the amount of noise generated in the past, particularly during the Sixties and Eighties. I must begin by saying that at that time, most people were used to the sound of planes locally and did not realise the potential impact of continual noise on health and well-being. If I may quote from the Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology ‘Postnote’ (June, 2003)

  1. current aircraft noise can affect the quality of life of half a million people living close to UK airports
  2. increases in air traffic could outstrip technological progress in making individual flights quieter and so worsen the noise climate around many of the UK’s airports over the next thirty years.
  3. As a result, more people could be affected by sleep disturbance, annoyance and possible health effects.
  4. Aircraft noise could constrain airport expansion unless substantial noise reductions are made.

Noise studies have been made and substantiated. Children at Blenheim School have their lessons constantly interrupted by the noise of planes at present, as the school, with its 450 pupils lies directly under the flight path. They no doubt live close to the school and their sleep pattern is directed by the night flights. I know from experience that it can be a difficult school to teach in – could the reason be that these children are stressed by outside influences as well as having to cope with the National Curriculum?

And yet, the only noise study that the airport has undertaken has been simulated by a computer, generating an estimate. There is no such thing as a ‘quiet’ aeroplane, and we stand to be bombarded by night and day.
Much has been said about people living under the flight path from choice, but as a Councillor, perhaps you might like to find out how many Council properties lie under the flight path at Southend or Rochford. People who have no choice about where they live will have been directed to these areas, where perhaps others would choose NOT to live.

Many of you on the Development Committee have chosen to live in Thorpe Bay and Shoeburyness, some distance from the airport and its problems. Perhaps if Boris Island gets under weigh, you too will be facing the problems of noise from aircraft and night flights with no restrictions. Will you choose to move house then?

Those who do hear the planes flying over their houses are not impressed by the idea that during peak times, there could be a flight every seven-and-a-half minutes, be it small noisy Cessna, maintenance flight or commercial flight.

Those who have moved here in the last fifteen years have only ever known a small quantity of flights, and those of us who have lived here for a long time deplore the idea of having to move because the noise makes life intolerable.

Remember, your decision will not only affect those living under the flight path in Leigh and Southend, but those in Rochford as well, some thirty thousand houses, with occupation in excess of 75,000 people. Is this something you want to be responsible for, or do you feel that the Government should call the application in…?

Sincerely Yours

Kiti Theobald

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

New Strategy

Saturday, November 14th, 2009

Hello 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

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

Objection to Councillors

Saturday, November 14th, 2009

Dear Councillor

We wish to object in the strongest possible terms to the proposals to expand Southend Airport and extend the runway.

We would like to you respond to this letter, acknowledging that you have received this letter as an objection.

The reasons for our objections are as follows:

We believe that any expansion to the airport site will involve unnecessary alterations to various local amenities and living space, bringing unpleasant consequences to the people living in this town – in particular to those of us who live near the airport.

Unpleasant consequences caused by any expansion to the airport:

  • Increase in air pollution from the increased air traffic.
  • Increased volume of traffic on roads that are already very busy, particularly during the rush hour times.
  • Research has shown that only 6% of people use public transport to travel to airports, so we do not believe that the installation of an additional railway station at the airport will be of any benefit in reducing the amount of increased traffic to and from the airport.

Other Objections:

  • We particularly object to the proposed ‘closure’ or diversion of Eastwoodbury Lane as this affects us personally:
    1. Closure or diversion of this road will deprive us of easy access to St. Laurence’s Church that currently, is within walking distance. Closure or diversion of this road will make it difficult for us to attend religious services being offered at this church and will result in increased use of the car as we continue to travel to and from the church.
    2. Closure or diversion of this road will also prevent us using the current easy access route through to our friends and relatives who live in Rayleigh, Hockley etc.
  • We also strongly object to the loss of playing fields and park recreational areas in Eastwoodbury Lane to accommodate the expansion of the runway and a car park to provide a park and ride scheme for the airport.

    We fail to understand why, when the town is so full of traffic, our local park and playing fields have to be destroyed to create a ‘Park and Ride’ scheme for the sole purpose of enabling visitors to the town just to travel the airport.

    On that note, why cannot the whole town have a park and ride scheme?
    If the airport should close, the site of the airport could be used to provide sufficient space to allow for an effective park and ride scheme that would benefit the whole town.

    This would be better than just providing a park and ride scheme for people to use the airport, when these same people would not be spending any time (or money) in the town.

  • The county of Essex already has a very big airport – Stansted. Anyone living beyond a ten mile radius outside of Southend finds that it is just as easy to travel to Stansted.
  • People living in Southend also confirm that Stansted Airport is very easy for them to travel to.
  • We do not believe that in the present financial climate that this is the right time to consider expanding an airport for passengers.
  • But we do believe that the intention is to provide facilities to increase the amount of freight that can be flown in and we are aware that at the present time there are no restrictions on night flights carrying freight. We are also aware that older planes are used for transporting freight by air. These older planes are noisier than modern passenger jets, creating more noise and emitting unpleasant fuel emissions over the town.

    • If these proposals go ahead, it will certainly keep people from wanting to work or live within Southend. It is already very difficult trying to get in or out of Southend as well as trying to move around the town by car or bus, due to the amount of traffic at present; the expansion of the airport will exacerbate this situation.

    Yours sincerely,

    Mr. & Mrs. Shardlow

Tags:
Posted in Letters, Local Government | 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 »

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »