Q4.9 What do you see as the greatest potential impact of development in the JAAP and how can this be mitigated?

Extension of the runway across Eastwoodbury Lane would make the operation of Arriva's service 9 bus route impossible in its current form. This service links the airport with Rayleigh town centre and station on a direct route. It also provides the bus service in Manners Way which would be lost.
The initial effect of the extension would be to reduce the bus service at the airport from 11 buses an hour to 6.

Too many flights.

1. Noise and other environmental implications, particularly from night flights, on the immediate and surrounding areas (eg Hockley, Hawkwell) must be carefully assessed and controlled
2. Road transport links to/from the airport and its surrounds need to be carefully considered and addressed. Consideration also needs to be taken of current proposals to build additional houses in the area (eg Hawkwell).
The combined effect of development (at the airport and also in villages like Hawkwell) on adjoining towns like Hockley needs to be carefully addressed.

I have looked at these plans and I think a few questions are raised.

1- Since I believe the airport is currently for sale, I wonder if it is wise to make these plans before the sale has taken place. I believe that these plans constitute an uncertainty that can only prolong the sale process and general confusion. I think it would make far more sense to stop proposing different plans that will impact on the market value of the business. Of course once it is sold, we will then know who the new owners will be and what they propose.

2- I notice at the moment that 1500 people are employed within the environs of the airport, but that most of them are not directly employed by the workings (flights/maintenance) of the airport. It seems to me that if the runways were given over to industrial use, there could be a lot of development and employment without the environmental "disbenifits" of an industry that is currently based on burning fossil fuels and creating CO2.

3- This brings me to my last point, which is to ask whether further development centred around an industry that is based on a limited resource (fossil fuels) is strategically sound for the future of this area.

Obviously I would be opposed to any plans which allow re-allocation of greenbelt land for a strategy with such strong environmental disbenefits!



I believe that as it stands, the airport makes a profit for its owners and as they are wishing to sell, there is no pressing reason to move ahead with any of these proposals. I am unaware of local employment problems and therefore am not at all sure what is in it for Rochford, nor why there is any need for haste.

The airport seems to have arrived at its present situation due to a complete lack of strategic foresight. Let's not continue in the same vein eh?

Regards Craig Carter

Development would blight the lives of many people in Rochford largely through noise and increased traffic. Largely only businedd travellers use the train to get to an airport and they will continue to prefer City. Roads into Southend are already congested. If Eastwoodbury lane is made difficult to use this will push more traffic through hall rd and southend road to reach the Anne Boleyn. This route is already often solid.

What detailed proposals have been given to alternative uses of the site as a generator for the area??

1. any proposals to increase current capacity of the airport.

2. any reduction of existing greenbelt land

3. ignorance of increased social requirements (hospitals/gps/dentists/parks etc)

4. not developing current 'brown field' sites

this can be mitigated by not developing the airport's capacity and considering other alternatives.

Overdevelopment, which can only be mitigated by rejecting airport expansion

It is apparent from your feature in Rochford Matters that you are no longer a supporter of the Global Fraud that carbon dioxide is causing global warming.

It must be clear to you that ANY increase in the use of the airport will result in an increase in the emissions from the aircraft.

Please make a public statement that you are satisfied that the effect that the carbon dioxide element of the emissions from additional flights will not in any way cause any further increase in global warming.

Your truly
P. Sarfas

We live under the main flight path & worry about increased noise,emissions & flight frequency particularly at anti-social hours.We do not see how this can be mitigated under the High Growth option as the airport is mostly surrounded by domestic housing.

The greatest potential impact of the development will be the increase level of noise associated with the possible increase in the aircraft movements and the increase in vehicular movement on the road network. The Borough of Southend-on-Sea is densely built-up and a number of residential areas are very close to the airport. The increase in the number air traffic movement will result increase the level of noise with take-off and landing of aircrafts. This increase in air traffic movement can be controlled through the appropriately worded condition on the future planning permission for the airport expansion. This should be clearly set out in the JAAP.

The expansion of the airport and the employment area is likely to increase the level traffic in and around the airport, to ensure that the potential impact is minimised, improvements to the public transport, cycling facilities and walking would be required as part of wider transport strategy. Scenario 3 has the potential to ensure that airport growth can contribute to the future management of the increased traffic. Any adverse impact of traffic increase can be mitigated against through improved public transport that will encourage modal shift way from the private car.

The expansion of the airport and the employment area is likely to some impact on the local ecology and/or the water quality. is increase is serving the airport should will need to be better managed to ensure that the. contribute to the need

Noise, pollution, increased traffic. keep the airport small and limit development

A busier flight path over the surrounding areas would create noise & misery for residents and eventually damage property values. A green light for development is a green light for greedy companies to push for more flights, increased passenger numbers and night flights.

Lessons from Stanstead people... not to mention congested roads , increased pollution. Not the way to put Southend on the map.

An unacceptable increase in aircraft noise pollution and road traffic pollution.
They cannot be mitigated within the airport's current location.

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

Increased noise, Pollution, lowering of quality of life for hudereds of residents many elderly in the area to to south of the proposed runway extension for the benefit of what is a private company development

With the lower growth scenarios, it will not be possible to mitigate to any significant extent some of the existing adverse impacts or risks to existing employment levels. With the higher growth scenarios, the greatest potential adverse impact would be from road traffic but this could be mitigated to result in a significant improvement compared to today by better public transport, enhanced cycling and walking routes and extensive travel planning. Other adverse impacts such as noise or the effects on ecology or water quality can also be mitigated by stricter controls applied to new types of airport activity. Sustainability involves a balance of positive and negative impacts and the positive benefits of employment growth are part of this equation.

In response to the proposed expansion of Southend Airport, I carefully read through your report. I cannot see any benefits to the people living in the surrounding areas, near and further afield.

Firstly the noise. People that have moved here in the last two decades have enjoyed peace and tranquility. That is why they moved here in the first place, so any expansion to the airport would obviously disrupt this. Forty planes plus daily from 7am until midnight is unacceptable.

The area would not appeal to a mixed bag as no one in their right mind would want to live near an airport, therefore property prices would be affected.

Newspapers are always referring to protests regarding Heathrow and Stansted about noise and every day living being unbearable.

The A127 and A13 is under enornmous pressure at the moment.

Airport traffic would make matters worse, regardless of a new train link, as we all know people prefer to use a car. Local people going to and from their place of work already have to deal with road congestion.

I am opposed to compulsory purchase as I have had first hand experience of this.

Please hang on to what little green belt we have left, for habitat and beauty. After all, no one wants to live in a concrete jungle.

Government should be bringing down carbon emissions not adding to it.

I am sorry but I totally oppose any expansion to the airport.

The greatest potential impact of the development of the JAAP is likely to be the increase in traffic generation in the wider area.This will be due to increases in leisure users spread throughout the day, but more significantly will be the growth in traffic flows generated by increased numbers of employees working at the airport and the expanded business park and travelling at peak times.Mitigation would be a strategic review of the highway infrastructure in South East Essex that results in significant physical improvements.

More flights will mean a lot more over-flying along the landing and take off routes - about 70% of the time planes will land from the east, and take off to the west, with the prevailing wind. More flights, and more expansion, will also mean more emission of greenhouse gases, which is contrary to the UK Government's stated policy of trying to reduce our emissions.

4.9 An extension to the runway. The only mitigation is not to do it.