Policy T1 - Link Road from Eastwoodbury Lane to Nestuda Way

this is needed as without it nearly every other proposal for the airport will fail.

Quite frankly I am astounded by the inadequacy of the transport infrastructure proposed to support the stated 1-2 million people using the airport and the several thousand using the new business park. How many of these people will be coming not via the A127 but via the route through Hockley and Hawkwell? This appears an ill considered plan bearing in mind the limitation of the local infrastructure and environment.

This is essential and requires immediate attention in order to maximise the potential of the plan and minimise further delays in implementing the plan.

See my comments on surface access.

I don't think the proposals are bold enough regarding transport links. Upgrades to roads is fine but there will still be problems with traffic using main ateries into Southend (i.e. A127). Expansion should only go ahead if a new outer bypass is built, taking traffic further outside of Southend to join A127/A130.

The road improvements are needed to allow the extension of the runway to allow for the use of better aircraft.

one word - congestion,congestion,congestion

This new link will take a lot of pressure off the existing "Bell" junction

This area is bursting at the seams due to traffic. How can this developement improve matters? It simply cannot. Those if us who live nearby are likely to find our lives blighted by increased traffic at all hours and become unable to easily connect between the local areas.

expansion will result in more congestion to an already highly congested area particularly with regard to main feeder arterial roads

Travelling from Hawkwell/Ashindon to Southend often the only route not gridlocked by roadworks/breakdowns is via Cherry orchard Lane/Eastwoodbury lane & Manners way.

The link road needs to cater for this whilst avoiding at all costs having to negotiate the Tesco Roundabout or the Bell Junction. A new roundabout half way along Nestuda Way would be required, although I doubt that a workable solution will be found so I will oppose the proposed expansion at every opportunity.
Also the Tesco roundabout needs to have a new southwest exit to provide a direct link from Rochford to the Leigh area.

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am very concerned about proposed plans of cutting out section of Eastwoodbury Lane due to extension of Airport Runway - does this mean that we are faced with the same error that was made by Southend Council when Tesco roundabout was built i.e, No direct access North or South from Tesco roundabout ! If we locals in the Whitehouse Road Area want to drive South of Southend Arterial Road, the only route is Kent Elms corner or the Bell Hotel crossing, the same applies when returning by road to travel North from the South side of the Arterial Road, It goes without saying that traffic chaos at both Kent Elms and the Bell is well known by every local resident.

At the moment we do have an alternative, to drive through Eastwoodbury Lane and connect with Manners Way to travel to and from Southend. Not much consideration was given to the Tesco roundabout. We request very careful road planning to avoid disastrous road chaos along this stretch of the Southend Arterial Road. Perhaps modifying Tesco roundabout to give direct access to Westbourne Grove and Southbourne Grove should be considered.

The new link road that will run from Eastwoodbury Lane to Nestuda Way will go STRAIGHT through the new St Lawrence park (with football pitch and childrens playground). It will also channel more traffic along Eastwoodbury Lane as it will connect with the park and ride. All this will meet up at the Tescos roundabout which will have to be negotiated if one wishes to go along into Eastwood/Rayleigh. This would put a HUGE amount of pressure on a roundabout that is already congested. See my comments on T2 safeguarded route.Totally against this proposal. Could the road not go under the runway?

As stated in the strategy this will pass through one of the designated "green areas".

The fact that you say an additional road would be constructed, from the Airport to Nestuda Way for the increase in traffic, does not alter the fact that the main route in and out of the area is still the A127.
The A127 is now at maximum capacity and will not cope with the extra traffic generated by the Stobart lorries and the New Business Parks.

Transport within the JAAP - General comments on this section

Air Quality/Greenhouse Gases

The greenhouse gas and global warming impacts from increased aviation needs to be taken into account. The proposed expansion could impact on the aim of reaching an 80% reduction in greenhouse gases by 2050.

Air traffic not only directly adds to ambient levels of pollutants but also indirectly, due to associated land-based traffic.

The document states the aspiration to increase passenger numbers to 2M by 2030. This should be supported with strong policies setting out how air quality issues will be designed out. I do not think Policy LS2 goes far enough.

Travel to airport

We would expect the airport to operate as a low emission zone, eg allowing only the lowest possible emissions vehicles to have access. Hybrid Taxis at Boston Airport receive concessions. The airport operational vehicles should, if possible go beyond any legal requirements of the time (eg currently Euro VI standards).

This is a good alternative to the existing road, and would allow for the runway extension

Is this some kind of joke? Southend is absolutely congested. The A127 into this area is constantly grid-locked. Why oh why would you want to try and bring more people in when the infrastructure is incapable of coping with it. However many 'link roads' you think you can build (ha!) there simply is not the space. Goodbye green, hello more concrete and car fumes.

As the airport gets more busy, the airport authorities will need to close the barriers on Eastwoodbury Lane much more frequently. On Tuesday night, I was stuck at the barriers for almost 10 minutes due to landing aircraft (I was subsequently told they were diversions from London City Airport).
A new link road will resolve this problem before it gets much worse.

Quite clearly no consideration seems to have been given to the fact that all traffic, existing and proposed, traveling to the new rail station or to Rochford and beyond from the A127 will have to proceed via either Rochford Road (which at present bears the brunt of heavy goods vehicles) or the lesser used 'A' road Manners Way and then cross the Warners Bridge bottleneck. The area is now so often grid locked that to consider increasing traffic volume is ludicrous. Perhaps our enlightened councillers are blind, and deaf when it comes to the misery they have already inflicted on those of us unfortunate enough to live in this area. It is futile to waste public money on yet another stop gap enterprise when the main arteries of the town are so often at a standstill, and no thought or action plan has been tabled to ease the present road congestion let alone that for the future.

Although a road improvement will not do any harm, I would not want to increase traffic movements in this area as it is likely to effect residents unfairly.

I am a married retired aircraft engineer born in Southend, have lived in Rochford for 43 years and worked at the airport in the sixties and seventies. My main objections are:

NOISE

The impact on the local residents including myself and my wife will be intolerable. The statement that the aircraft using the airport will be quieter is not valid due to the fact this will only be relevant if the runway is long enough ie similar to Stansted, Luton and Gatwick where they are able to use noise abatement procedures. The extension proposed in the airport plan will come nowhere near this, which means to achieve the correct climb out they will have to use full power and this WILL be heard by thousands of residents. This information was obtained from my son and a very close friend of mine who are both airline pilots and have a good operating knowledge of this airport and the aircraft which could be using it.

ROAD TRAFFIC

The impact on local traffic will be chaotic, particularly with regard to the proposed closure of Eastwoodbury Lane, as this takes most of the overload from the A127, I know this a I use it almost on a daily basis. To close it would put all the west bound and east bound commuter traffic back on to the A127 which, if you live in the area you will know is very congested both morning and afternoons from Southend to Rayleigh and beyond and suffers serious accidents almost on a daily basis.

The roundabout at the airport itself is frequently blocked by cars queuing to get into the business park, I have been stuck there many times.

In addition, all the other Airports serving London are adjacent to or very close to motorways, we just have the A127 which as previously stated is grossly inadequate even with todays traffic.

NEW RAILWAY STATION

I think the envisaged use of the station is overstated, I have travelled to many places in the world by air for business and pleasure and from all the airports serving London and I have never once used the train as it is too inconvenient, unreliable and expensive.

ENVIRONMENT

Finally having lived in Rochford for a very long time I have seen it change from a busy and pleasant market town to an overcrowded urban sprawl.

Take the new square!!! Shops still empty, often covered with litter, and frequented by youths, and at times looking deserted, I call that bad planning. I think the Council Planners would do well to look at our local infrastructure and amenities instead of trying to over populate the area with more business parks and dual carriageways going nowhere.

I will close by quoting an article in the evening echo by Richard Evans head of environmental services who says:

"Clean air is important for the health of our residents, and it is important that we know our businesses are staying below legal limits for emissions."

"I am also pleased to announce we are on target to meet this 100 per cent figure again this year, reinforcing our status as one of the most attractive districts in Essex in which to live."

I suggest the proposals you are putting forward are totally at odds with this statement and will have the opposite effect.

The current level of operations are just tolerable as they are, and the expansion of the airport and the surrounding area is not necessary or appropriate for the future well being of this District.

Too much traffic congestion already. Roads cannot cope with extra traffic

The present infrastucture is totally inadequate to take existing traffic and these problems start well before the Southend boundary. Eastwoodbury Lane is a vital alternative to the A127. Changes to local routes are being promoted to the detriment of residents & drivers. There will be a huge increase of additional private passenger vehicles along with Stobart's articulated haulage vehicles congesting our roads. I reiterate: this locality is totally unsuitable for expansion. Who benefits from this development? Who is getting a nice little earner out of it?

The local disruption is unacceptable. We do not need an increase in traffic on the A127, which this will engender. The A127 becomes solid in traffic already, how will such a narrow trunk road cope with the sort of numbers which are being suggested here?

A plan exists to get traffic to and from the Airport to the A127. What happens when it gets there? If only half of the 2 million passengers came by car with three people in a car that would represent a round trip of 660,000 extra cars on the road.Extra housing and more jobs will add to the burden. Feeder roads which tend to be ignored e.g. B1013 could particularly suffer. There are no concrete plans to improve public transport. Even the suggestion that the public will use their cars less lacks any substance.

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.

Read the posted comments. All seem to talk of current congestion and this is exactly what this expansion will address. A road designed to handle increased traffic that will reduce congestion that exists today.

This is a vital link road and ap upgraded road allowing for the extension of the runway is an excellent proposal

ï‚· All proposed new roads and road improvements, including A127, Eastwoodbury Lane and Cherry Orchard Way, are
ï‚· All other infrastructure improvements, related to traffic, transportation (including public transport), and parking (staff, visitors, and incoming/ outgoing transportation) are in place prior to airport growth and business parks development. Planning restrictions to be approved and in place limiting on-site car parking to essential requirements in place prior to airport growth (especially runway extension) and new business parks development only. All businesses, including the airport, to contribute to Travel Plans.