As with Scenario 1, in Issue 1 under the heading Airport model and infrastructure, it could be noted that the Airport would also still be vulnerable to an inability to maintain its infrastructure in the face of increasing safety and security requirements. There is also a risk that the CAA will require an extension to the RESA at the north east end which would reduce the runway length even further, impacting on the Airport's MRO capability

As noted in our comment on 5.2, the Arup forecast is for 330 net airport related jobs. In Issue 2, Future employment role, it is suggested that 3,200 new jobs could be accommodated. This would therefore imply that the vast majority of new jobs would not be airport-related, attracted by the availability of space rather than by a demand for the particular airport location.

In Issue 3, under Green Belt, the boundary would have to be revised to go around the new business park area and the old brickworks site, unless these are developed within the Green Belt. Across the Airport, the boundary would remain arbitrary and unrelated to natural features or existing development.

In Issue 4 under the heading Improvements, there is a need for improvements to public transport, cycling or walking for existing employment areas. However, as with Scenario 1, there would be very limited opportunities for such improvements.