Comment

Representation ID: 9235

Received: 08/04/2009

Respondent: CPREssex

2. RUNWAY EXTENSION

The original Airport Master Plan (April 2005) envisaged, on a medium growth scenario, a little over 2.1 million passengers in 2030. This was without an extended runway. We understand the arguments that the runway extension might enable this level to be reached earlier and that it would allow larger and ostensibly quieter aircraft to be used; also that the 2 mppa might be carried with fewer ATMs if the right routes, carriers and demand levels were achieved to enable major use of larger aircraft.

However, in our response to the IOR (4 August 2008) CPREssex argued that this option (Scenario 3) was unacceptable - as was scenario 2(b). We refer the councils back to this document. We said:

"The other two scenarios [scenarios 1 and 2(a)] - proposing large growth in passenger aviation activity - document progressively greater negative impacts (Tables 11.5.3 and 11.5.4). The results would be increasingly damaging and, scenario 3 would involve loss of about 50% of green belt currently outside the airport boundary but within the JAAP area.

Our position has not changed

We have referred to the net growth in noise impact of the increase in ATMs whether with the existing or extended runway. It should also be noted that merely flying quieter aircraft is only an advantage if there are no more of them. It is aircraft that disturb people in their houses and gardens not decibels.

No reference is made to potential impacts on All Saints Church - a Listed Building - or nearby residential properties. The current runway ends at Eastwoodbury Lane and so aircraft taking-off/landing do so some way from the church and houses. The extended runway would mean planes taking-off/landing beside the church and much closer to the houses. Noise and lighting impacts would be greatly exacerbated. We need far greater clarity on the possible consequences for the church and it's functioning.

We have also drawn attention to the unacceptable land-take proposals consequent on the runway extension.

The POR contains no reference to demolition of or impacts on residential or other properties. The impacts of the proposed new link road are not spelled out. In the absence of any specific information the most reasonable assumption is that there would be negative effects on communities in the area.