Q4.8 What enhancements to the environment and amenity of the area should be made? What are the priority areas?

Prittle Brook and the rail corridor need to be developed as attractive green corridors providing high quality pedestrian and cycling access from Priory Park through to Rochford and linking with the new station.

I am sure some improvements are needed e.g. the old brick field site could be a museum.

Thank you for sending me the brochure re:- the proposed development of Southend Airport.

I have grave concerns for the future of residents like ourselves on the impact of a larger airport and extended runway at this airport.

Apart from the noise levels, when we are in our back garden (which we love) on a number of occasions when the planes are about to take off, our whole garden and conservatory fill up with emission fumes, the taste and smell of these fumes in your noise and mouth are very distressing and we have to come indoors until the fumes have gone away, this has had a real impact on our quality of life in our home and garden, and we know we are breathing in carcinogenic fumes from these aircrafts, so with bigger and more aircrafts taking off this will definitively affect our future health and lives.

The other big concern is night flights, I was told by the airport that they have a 24hrs permit to fly aircrafts at night and we fear that this will also start to happen in the future as the airport starts to grow, so this again will have a negative impact on our health through noise levels, depriving family with children and residents in Rochford of disturbed sleep, which would lead to ill health.

The Southend Road that runs along side of the airport is quite a narrow road, and is very busy and congested and you feel at times you are taking your life into your own hands walking along the pavement, so again by increasing the size of the airport there will be more traffic, more noise, more pollution, also we fear our small side roads will become parking zones for travellers by car to the airport, as if there are pay and display machines inside the airport, people travelling by car will use our small roads to park in for however long they will be away, again restricting our access and exit from our homes.

I know my letter will be read and put to one side, as money is more powerful than our quality of life, but I felt that I needed to write to you to express my concerns and to say maybe sometimes you should take a step back and ask yourselves what is progress and who will suffer because of this if it takes away our quality, peace, security and most of all our right to live a happy, healthy life in our homes free from anxiety.

Thank you for your letter of the 9th July 2008 regarding your consultation programme. I have no access to the website so I cannot view the four scenarios but instread, I am writing this short letter to you.

My views are as follows:-

I think the railway station is essential and should have been built years ago. I hope it will be for the use of everybody and not just airport passengers.

The idea of a diversionary route for Eastwoodbury Lane is not my choice. I would support the retention of the existing route with an underpass for the extended runway. This option has already been suggested in the local press.

I am in support of the Airport and wish to see it prosper. I hope there will be a demand for the additional services which you aim to provide. My concern is not to change the appearance of the surrounding area anymore than can be helped.

With good wishes

You must "counter" the anti lobby. Looking at the "Leigh Times" there is a noisy campaign starting.

Priority must be given to protecting the rights of residents to quiet enjoyment.

more amenities for the public to enjoy. greater accessibility to the public.

no existing green areas should be built on.

In response to your request on views on the above subject, I object to this expansion on the following points.

Firstly the infrastructure is inadequate, I know a lot of people who will not live in this area because of the traffic problems as high-lighted only recently with the gas leak at Rayleigh. It seems that on a fairly frequent basis that there are problems on the A127 or the A13 and everything comes to a stanstill. Even without this the traffic is past saturation point and would not make it a popular choice to use this airport (and not miss flights!)

The car parking facilities at this airport are not on par with any other airport and at the end of the day passengers usually want the convenience of their own cars and do not like to use public transport. Which brings us to the use of the new proposed rail link to the airport, which could be made unsustainable or even obsolete. I know from other airports that they rely heavily on car parking, shopping areas etc to make any profits, otherwise the landing fees usually have to be so high the airport loses out to cheaper options.

It has been said about this being for the local population, which I have read in the local news that a lot of the new residents of Southend seem to live on benefits, so not the healthy economy that will provide for a sustained larger airport.

There are the environmental issues such as noise, vibration and pollution, which are becoming paramount to the government and world leaders in general. They cannot be ignored forever. The oil crisis which seems to be growing, demand outstripping supply. The aviation industry is one of the first to be affected by all this. When all this hits home is there going to be a lot of white elephants in the Southeast. There is the concern of shrinking green belt land, it seems in this area it has been built on more than most areas, so the area is already lacking in green belt. There is also concern of more demand on the water supply in the drought ridden area of the Southeast.

The economic arguments do not add up either as the Stop Stansted Expansion group have proved even with a larger airport expansion proposal such as Stansted. They have proved this to government bodies and the business work, but it seems the government are in the pocket of BAA and do not judge this on the facts. Let's hope Rochford Council are more sensible.

The idea that the expansion will help with the Olympic Games, I believe a couple of weeks event that will leave a lot of waste in its wake. This is based on speaking to business people in the London area. So generally I think it is a bad idea to expand this airport, there seems to be a glut of airport in this part of the country anyway and makes this unnecessary.

Safe, independant from roads, cycle routes to all areas would be major improvement.
Perhaps a light rail transport system could be developed to connect various parts of the area.

I do not have a computer. I am sorry I have tried to answer the questions but feel I haven't got all the information! Haven't been much help. Felt the need to complete as you sent a stamped addressed envelope. Sincere apologies.

The future expansion of the airport and related economic growth should create an opportunities for enhancement to the environment and the local amenity areas. The priority should be the improvement of local transport and better accessibility (public transport, cycling and walking). Future development at the airport and the expansion of local businesses should contribute to the enhancement of the physical environment and improved accessibility to the open countryside and amenity areas for recreation and leisure.

Further to your request for observations on the four scenarios set out in your Plan, I would comment as follows:

1. If it was not for the pressure of an expansion of the airport the majority of the suggestoins would not have arisen. Such jargon as environmental enhancement and mitigation are being used to cload the pressure exerted for a commercial gain by the airport operators.

2. If the runway is to be extended and/or Eastwoodbury Lane is to be closed with the new section of roadway built then some of the proposals for additional commercial use might be justified but certainly not the absurd proposal in scenario 3 to relocate the rugby club. The club has a valuable clubhouse which would be very expensive to replace without any tangible benefit envrionmentally or otherwise. There is already a surplus of commercial property and more empty units will benefit noone.

3. Although it would appear as irrelevant to the airport expansion a case can be made out for some development in the Brickworks site.

To sum up I am of the opinion that the best option for the residents of Rochford and Southend is Scenario 1. Further development of the airport would increase both noise and pollution and the detrimental effects on the residents far outway the commercial benefits, mainly to the operators.

I think the airport has so much potential and to keep it as it is is a waste when it could bring so much to area.

There is great local demand for European flights whether day trips or holiday flights. During 70's and 80's Southend Airport was extremely busy and European flights were often wait-listed as flights were full.

Many schools would fall under the flight path.

Southend Airport and Environs Joint Area Action Plan consultation (JAAP)

Response from Hilary Davison

2.1 Are the assets of the JAAP area fully reported and understood?
No. Rochford Hundred Golf Course And Rochford Tennis Club are not recorded

2.2 Are there any important assets missing from the assessment?
No

3.1 Do you agree with the overall vision for the JAAP?
Yes

3.2 Do the objectives set out cover the key requirements from the area?
Yes But with following amendments
b) Insert local regional after thriving
c) add to end are in place before any expansion of the airport and other areas of the JAAP.
d) remove whether; change or for and

3.3 Are there any other objectives that might help to guide the selection of the preferred option/options and JAAP?
Major public and private transport infrastructure improvements
To protect & enhance biodiversity issues within the area covered and those outside that may be affected by the JAAP area

4.1 What do you see as the role of London Southend Airport in the future?
1. Provide air transport and aviation related industries
2. To secure regeneration to enable it to reach its potential to function as a local regional airport (SBC Core Strategy, Objective SO11)
More on Newquay model expending to Norwich model with required infrastructure. Catering for the niche UK market bringing more passengers in and out and increasing the tourist market.Destinations to N & Central Europe. Thereafter look to northern and central continent, CI and Ireland targeting 'short break market'
3. Act as a driver for the economy

4.2 How can the airport best be developed to drive and support the local economy?
Airport expansion along with economic/business improvements work best as a package. It should be consequential to, and not specifically be the driver.

4.3 What role should the JAAP play in supporting wider employment growth in the sub-region?
JAAP to act as facilitator for both authorities to work together for the regeneration of the area

4.4 Is the area suitable for significant growth in employment?
Yes - But must consider whether growth in employment will create added vehicle movements & therefore an increase in air pollution & road congestion.
Major trunk road improvements vital

4.5 Will the area be attractive to investors?
Yes, if high or medium airport growth options are chosen; if leisure acvtivities are included and better tranportation is in place.

4.6 Are there additional options to consider?
Yes probable detrimental effect of relocation of existing businesses from other business parks in the vicinity causing displacement of labour and run down of other sites e.g. Progress Road, Purdeys Way and Sutton Road

4.7 Should the Green Belt be considered for revision? If so, how should it be revised?
Only the green belt within the airport perimeter should be revised and then only in accordance with airport expansion and safety issues The Area ii(a) should be considered for use for permitted expansion of Aviation Way Business Park (i.e.10acres[4.05h) only) within Green Belt Area as is the Old Brickworks
OR that only those areas be taken out of Green Belt designation

4.8 What enhancements to the environment and amenity of the area should be made? What are the priority areas?
General recreational enhancements for all the population, such as a Nature Park. To be funded out of Developers Contributions and Country Park be extended to take in all Green Belt land between Southend & Rochford
(2) Extra care and vigilance to prevent industrial waste polluting Eastwood Brook. This has been a problem in the past and probably will after expansion of industrial area

4.9 What do you see as the greatest potential impact of development in the JAAP and how can it be mitigated?
Carbon and aviation fuel emissions and noise pollution - Create a 20 year airport expansion plan with improved transportation included.
Have proper consultations with fixed based operators
Mitigation by restricting the types of aircraft used and restricting night flying

4.10 What do you consider to be the transport priorities for the JAAP?
Firstly, identify the cachment area targeted for airport passengers and the other component parts of the JAAP area and consider the new and improved roads required.
There is no conceivable answer to road improvements for the maximum number of passenger numbers considered in the JAAP
Road linkage to central Southend and to the west to be put in place before airport developments take place
As the number of passengers increases then consideration given to extra trains specifically for Southend Airport to and from London.

4.11 How can a shift from car use to other modes of transport be achieved?
Implementation of a travel plan for airport staff and businesses on the airport Park and Rde schemes with shuttle buses to/from the airport
Expensive parking fees at the airport and surrounding roads (with residents' permits)
Much improved local bus services to/from all local areas.

4.12 Do you agree with the proposed areas for change?
No

4.13 Are there any areas that should be added or removed? Why?
Remove
(ii) Agricultural land north of Aviation Way Business Park except :i (old brickworks)
ii(a) (10acres actually on the north side of Aviation Way itself, for limited development only)
iic (buffer zone)
(v) Agricultural land south of airport boundary, currently cricket pitch, agricultural land and private allotments, unless reserved for recreational purposes

5.1 Which is your preferred scenario for the future of the Southend Airport area
Replace with Medium Growth 2b Aviation Cluster

5.2 How could your preferred scenario be further enhanced?
By not revising any Green Belt except what lies within the airport boundary and i + iia + iic
A better mix of leisure inc. theme parks, office and light engineering

5.3 Are there any other scenarios which you feel have not been considered? Expansion of Maintenance, Repair and Overhaul operations within area (iii) Land at end of Aviation Way
2. Accept that the prevailing road and rail infrastructure is inadequate and cannot easily be enhanced to accommodate an international airport.
Look at a regional airport on the lines of Newquay initially and engage with fixed based operators to plot the way forward with an agreed plan over say 20 years
Ensure that the plan covers both inward and outward passengers to support local needs in air travel requirements and as part of the promotion of Southend and its locality for the tourist industry

Realistically, enhancements can only be funded from economic growth. The priority area is in transport, where existing poor links can be enhanced by improved public transport, walking and cycling routes. A clear statement should also be made that St Laurence and All Saints Church would not be moved.

Opportunities should exist for enhancement of the environment and local amenity areas,including accessibility to the surrounding countryside for leisure and recreation.

Close down the airport and return the airfield to agriculture

I think that the modelling or comparison of Southend airport to any other should be avoided unless it can be shown that there is an identical surrounding infrastructure eg transport links, adjacent amenities. This seems unlikely to me, so I suggest that the case of Southend airport should be considered entirely on its own merits (albeit good, bad and ugly examples from other airports should be taken into account).

As much green belt land as possible, encouraging ecological ideas (water savings,energy savings etc) in the development

More green open space should be made available for the benefit of residents.