Policy ENV6 - Green Buffer East of Railway

Support

Representation ID: 4923

Received: 07/03/2009

Respondent: Miss Laura Van Assen

This is a sensible idea

Support

Representation ID: 5033

Received: 09/03/2009

Respondent: Mr K Meikle

I fully support.

Object

Representation ID: 5154

Received: 12/03/2009

Respondent: Mr Graham Whitehead

Green buffer. I am sure this had trees in the early artist impressions. You know the pictures that never show houses near the airport.
Oh yes, but for how long?
The new train station, it is not a terminus, nothing terminates there, does not have any provision for rail commuters to park. I believe the plan is for them to continue to park at Rochford BR & be bussed to the new station. This , down a already over loaded route. Of course some will park down the side roads, this will really help the local residents, yes I'm one.

Object

Representation ID: 5204

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: 5437

Received: 25/03/2009

Respondent: Mrs A Wate

scrappy land, no real value as currently used either greatly improve it, or land could be put to more productive use including widening of road.

Object

Representation ID: 5572

Received: 15/05/2009

Respondent: London Southend Airport

As noted under our comments above about Area ix, this policy can be achieved in addition to using area ix as part of the multimodal transport interchange, possibly including SERT. The policy therefore needs to be amended to note that this area should be designed to accommodate transport and access facilities to serve the already approved station layout and to prevent fly parking in adjacent residential areas, as well as significant landscaping to provide a buffer between the Airport and the residential area.

Support

Representation ID: 5589

Received: 25/03/2009

Respondent: mr kevin salt

It is excellent news for the local residents to see that this area is now marked as a 'green buffer'. Not so long ago, the Airport operators wanted to turn it into a huge car park & were extremely dismissive of the residents objections - but after a campaign organised by local Parish/District Councillors, the airport withdrew its application at very short notice indeed.

The council must guarantee that this green buffer cannot be changed.

Object

Representation ID: 5644

Received: 25/03/2009

Respondent: karen sutherland

why do these residential properties get to have their amenities protected when no such consideration has been given to all the other properties that will be affected? Probably because this scrappy bit of ground was not big enough for another retail park and by leaving it they tick a 'green box'

Object

Representation ID: 5691

Received: 26/03/2009

Respondent: Allan Trower

I strongly object to the plans to extend southend airport. I do not believe the area needs another airport, particularly one that is in an urban area and will effect many people's lives in leigh on sea, both financially through the fall in house prices and environmentally. Plans to have night flights are totally unacceptable and will be detremental people's lives including children and will effect their education. I for one will be discussing this with my Local MP to stop this ridiculous proposal. A far better plan would have been to move the Hospital to the Airport site!!!

Object

Representation ID: 5739

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.

Object

Representation ID: 5782

Received: 26/03/2009

Respondent: Gemma Cudlipp

A green buffer would not be needed if the airport doesn't expand. And are you planning to insulate them from the noise and air pollution?? There must be some fantastic new 'protection' technique I haven't heard of as I can't see how a 'green buffer' would make any difference at all to the suffering they will endure as a result of this planned expansion.

Object

Representation ID: 5825

Received: 27/03/2009

Respondent: Mr T Clark

Whilst it is important to take account of neighbouring properties, they would already appear affected by road and train noise.
The advent of the airport station should help in reducing train noise to these properties, as the trains will be slower moving into and out of the station.

I don't think that any future use should be ruled out for this land.

It may be essential in the future
for a SERT route from Southend to Rochford, perhaps with a bus station for the airport.
It may be an area for a safe cycle/pedestrian route north to south.
It may become essential area for station parking.

Support

Representation ID: 5852

Received: 27/03/2009

Respondent: MR J GRANGER

How can this be a bad thing? I fully support this.

Object

Representation ID: 6028

Received: 29/03/2009

Respondent: Mr Derek Waddy-Smith

to airport expansion and therefore this.

Object

Representation ID: 6128

Received: 31/03/2009

Respondent: Mrs Joanna Spencer

its already there why change it

Object

Representation ID: 6296

Received: 02/04/2009

Respondent: Ms Jane Rose

There is no definition here, or in law, of what constitutes a 'green buffer'. So it is impossible to tell what this document is actually referring to by use of the term.

The 'green buffer' could be 4 inches of grass.

This part of the document is unacceptable as it doesn't not explain what is being proposed.

Object

Representation ID: 6434

Received: 03/04/2009

Respondent: Mrs J Greenwood

Insufficient green buffer.

Object

Representation ID: 6475

Received: 03/04/2009

Respondent: Mr Ian Bartley

This work should be carried out anyhow

Object

Representation ID: 6509

Received: 04/04/2009

Respondent: David 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 emmissions, concrete infrstructure) without significant impact on the quality of peoples lives.

Object

Representation ID: 6591

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: 6669

Received: 05/04/2009

Respondent: Mr Heath Aldridge

Traffic concerns / property prices devaluation

Object

Representation ID: 6670

Received: 05/04/2009

Respondent: Mr Heath Aldridge

Traffic concerns / property prices devaluation

Object

Representation ID: 6740

Received: 05/04/2009

Respondent: Charles Wetton

This is a token "green" gesture to appease the local community for the damage and disruption that would follow this expansion.

Object

Representation ID: 6956

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: 7168

Received: 07/04/2009

Respondent: Mr A James

This already exists.

Support

Representation ID: 7345

Received: 08/05/2009

Respondent: Mr. Terence DAVIES

Yes, this gives a little 'breathing' space for those who live along the Southend Road. Furthermore, to use part of this land for access to the 'down' platform could cause difficulties of access from the highway.

Object

Representation ID: 7499

Received: 08/04/2009

Respondent: Mrs Carolyn Higgs

object

Object

Representation ID: 7628

Received: 08/04/2009

Respondent: Mr Paul Gillard

I object that the rules can be changed when needed to fit in with new proposed developments

Object

Representation ID: 7658

Received: 08/04/2009

Respondent: Mr Melvyn Helsey

This is a token "green" gesture to appease the local community for the damage and disruption that would follow this expansion.The area is already 'green'

Object

Representation ID: 7707

Received: 08/04/2009

Respondent: kevin keeble

frfrf