Policy E7 - Development of Area 2 - Saxon Business Park

Support

Representation ID: 5006

Received: 09/03/2009

Respondent: Mr K Meikle

Fully Support

Object

Representation ID: 5175

Received: 13/03/2009

Respondent: Mr B Jones

STRONGLY OBJECT TO ALL EXPANSION. Do minimum or preferably no expansion.The increase in aircraft noise for us residents will become intolerable, emissions will increase. The road system cannot cope with current traffic levels. If 2m passenger movements are reached this will require about 4000 extra car journeys per day!!! Imagine the road upgrading work for the next few years that would be required. This area has a high percentage of elderly people who hardly fly. Who will the expansion benefit, people flying from outside the region and the business people and major shareholders who will make millions of pounds.

Object

Representation ID: 5329

Received: 19/03/2009

Respondent: Mr terence white

The airport owners should fund all changes.

Support

Representation ID: 5410

Received: 25/03/2009

Respondent: Mrs A Wate

agree i think the sports facilities are important

Object

Representation ID: 5518

Received: 24/03/2009

Respondent: karen sutherland

the airport owners should fund all changes... and it must be galling for those who are facing compulsory purchase orders that the rugby club will get 'new club house facilities" whilst they are being forced out of their homes.

Object

Representation ID: 5604

Received: 25/03/2009

Respondent: Mr Graham Whitehead

The rugby club & the tennis club (the latter actually own the land & well need to be purchased first) will be funded by the development of area 2.
look, if you can not fill existing empty business sites, sure going to find it easy to fill these with the additional costs.
Again, this is not a precursor for extending the runway, way lump it in together, confuse & divide tactics?

Object

Representation ID: 5711

Received: 26/03/2009

Respondent: Allan Trower

This will have a negative on:-

1. Environment (noise and pollution)
2. Wildlife and greenbelt
3. Surrounding residential properties
4. Public Services (Health and Education)
5. Infrastructure (congestion)

I dont believe the sweetner on job creation given the current climate so dont be fooled by this one. I can't see many companies wanting to invest in this proposal.

Support

Representation ID: 5823

Received: 27/03/2009

Respondent: Mr T Clark

The desirability of inserting a further junction/roundabout should be looked at on the corner of Aviation Way, where it is very adjacent to Cherry Orchard Way. Certainly improved cycle/pathway facilities should be provided here.

Object

Representation ID: 5873

Received: 28/03/2009

Respondent: MR JEREMY DAVENPORT

Why should a rugby clubb who have taken many years to build up be disrupted in this way? Especially when the prospect of new jobs has been overstated

Object

Representation ID: 5994

Received: 29/03/2009

Respondent: Mr Derek Waddy-Smith

No case has been made for the need for these business units so, without demand, how can you supply?

Support

Representation ID: 6049

Received: 30/03/2009

Respondent: Mr Rick Jackson

As someone who works in Southend and lives in Rochford, the economic and employment benefits of the airport development far outweigh any of the objections put forward.

Object

Representation ID: 6102

Received: 31/03/2009

Respondent: Mrs Joanna Spencer

Are the airport paying all the fees to move the rugby club?

Object

Representation ID: 6163

Received: 31/03/2009

Respondent: Mr Jon Spencer

this would not need to be done if the airport was not expanded.

Comment

Representation ID: 6315

Received: 02/04/2009

Respondent: dave willats

this sounds like its already happend or am i jumping the gun ; |

Object

Representation ID: 6342

Received: 02/04/2009

Respondent: jenny barton

Why move the club the facilies are excellent allowing rugby to be played throughout the season due to exceptional drainage? And who knows when the new club would be up and running I cannot imagine this will be top priority in the grand scheme of things. What is a healthy enjoyable hobby for hundreds will be blighted by noise and pollution.

Object

Representation ID: 6419

Received: 03/04/2009

Respondent: Mrs J Greenwood

If the Business Park were to go ahead it should relocate all green plaing fields before commencement since is only part is completed green belt land could be totally lost.

Object

Representation ID: 6562

Received: 04/04/2009

Respondent: Mr Brian Birnie

I feel let down already that work of some kind is in progress in the Southend Road location. It appears that a decision has been made by Rochford and Southend Councils already.

I strongly object to the expansion of Southend Airport and the changes that are associated with it. This list is a few of the reasons.
Increased pollution. Increased traffic on roads already congested. Increased noise 24 hours no guarantee to limits. Reduction in house values as can already be seen just with the expansion proposals. Increase in freight flights these planes won't be quieter than newer style passenger planes.

Object

Representation ID: 6633

Received: 05/04/2009

Respondent: Mrs Hilary Frances Bramble

How can the Rugby Club operate with all the noise and pollution from an airport running 40 odd flights in and out between 06.30 and 23.00 hours

Object

Representation ID: 6750

Received: 05/04/2009

Respondent: Mr David Thomas

I strongly object to the proposed Business Parks near Southend Airport being in linked with the proposed Airport Runway Extension.
There is no dependency between them suggested in either the new or old JAAP reports or anything else I have seen. According to the JAAP Report of the 7380 total jobs expected to be created 6200 jobs are due to the Business Parks, leaving only 1180 due to the Airport expansion. How many of these 1180 would be created without the runway extension is not given. These two proposals should be considered and voted on independently.

Object

Representation ID: 6922

Received: 06/04/2009

Respondent: P Crawshaw

I strongly object to the runway extension and associated developments. They will blight the lives of many residents in the area due to the increase in noise, pollution and traffic to provide very limited benefits.

Object

Representation ID: 7308

Received: 07/04/2009

Respondent: Kylie Heath

The proposed airport extension would have an adverse effect on the local town. The area is simply too built up with local housing to support the extension. It is too late to try to extend the airport without ruining the quality of life of thousands of people.

Object

Representation ID: 7358

Received: 07/04/2009

Respondent: Mr Jeremy Huband

No need to move rugby club unless we agree to this over developmennt.

Object

Representation ID: 7582

Received: 08/04/2009

Respondent: Mr Paul Gillard

I object to the proposed development because the sustainable transport measures take no account of the A127 which is unable to cope with any more traffic, be it from passengers (a smaller percentage of which will use the railway) or the expected extra employees at the new industrial areas.

Support

Representation ID: 7689

Received: 08/04/2009

Respondent: kevin keeble

No thanks.

Object

Representation ID: 7716

Received: 09/04/2009

Respondent: Mr Michael Powell

The rugby club can stay where it is if there is no actual demand for yet more indusrial parks. There are plenty of empty premises in the area already.

Object

Representation ID: 7873

Received: 09/04/2009

Respondent: Mrs Ellen Maria O'Hara

Southend is an area which is already heavily built up. Where do the emergency landings take place? The air and noise pollution will be a total nightmare for existing residents. Where will all the traffic go? In 1966 the government refused the proposed expansion of runway 15/33 on environmental grounds - surely this argument is even stronger today - we are ALL aware of the environment problems surrounding this!

Object

Representation ID: 7981

Received: 11/04/2009

Respondent: Mrs Shirley Emery

I object due to infrastructure already fully stretched/environment and the fact that there are already so many empty business facilities in and around Southend. Why loose more green areas? Regenerate what we have would be sensible for all our futures. Leave the rugby club where it is!
Who has asked for the business park? Or is it just a sweetner with a promise of extra jobs with the airport extension?

Object

Representation ID: 8107

Received: 14/04/2009

Respondent: mr peter allwright

no

Object

Representation ID: 8231

Received: 15/04/2009

Respondent: Mrs Jennie Johnson

Why should we spend more money (our council tax!) destroying what we already have to replace with much the same. NOT WANTED!!

Object

Representation ID: 8374

Received: 18/04/2009

Respondent: Katherine Emery

So an expanded airport is good for the environment? We have few clean green an open spaces in the crowded SE. Can we please just except you cannot squeeze in more pollution (noise, carbon emissions, concrete infrastructure) without significant impact on the quality of peoples lives.