1. Introduction
Object
London Southend Airport and Environs Joint Area Action Plan Submission Document
Representation ID: 29167
Received: 16/03/2013
Respondent: South East Essex Friends of the Earth
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The JAAP is fundamentally flawed, irrational, many of the objectives are undeliverable and it contradicts three of the four key objectives in the Government's Aviation Policy Framework.
The JAAP consultation process has been flawed from the start and it has been clear that the councils had made their minds up before seeking the views of the public.
This plan will result in massive increases in greenhouse gas emissions, a deterioration in health of the local population caused by additional noise and it permits LSA to continue to ignore the views of local people.
The JAAP is fundamentally flawed, irrational, many of the objectives are undeliverable and it contradicts three of the four key objectives in the Government's Aviation Policy Framework.
Before going into detail on these points, it is important to stress that the local community is appalled that the original JAAP process and consultation was ignored, it was suspended when London Southend Airport (LSA) submitted its planning application and has only now been resurrected after the Airport has extended the runway, facilitating a massive expansion in operations.
The original JAAP process showed that the majority of people opposed the scale of expansion that had been proposed by the Councils and their views were completely ignored. More recently, this group conducted its own public opinion poll and found that 61% of people still oppose expansion of the airport.
Turning to the Aviation Policy Framework, it is irrational to the point of being perverse to suggest that the JAAP will make its contribution to ensuring that the aviation sector makes a contribution to reducing global greenhouse gas emissions. It is impossible to expand operations at Southend Airport to the extent planned and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. It is fantasy to assume otherwise.
Southend Airport is surrounded on all sides by large numbers of houses, indeed it has more housing in its immediate vicinity than any other regional airport in the UK. It is therefore grossly misleading for the JAAP document to suggest that the local councils have done anything to limit or reduce the number of people who suffer from aircraft noise. The councils have failed in their duty of care to the local population by doing everything in their power to increase flights and therefore noise. The disgraceful decision to allow night flights poses a serious threat to the health of the people who now have to suffer absolute misery caused by this irresponsible and callous development.
The airport is responsible for its own Airport Consultation Committee and selects the members itself. This results in an entirely toothless organisation that does not represent the views of the local population. Indeed, the residents action committee - SAEN - has been refused membership of this committee. It is therefore impossible to suggest that LSA engages in a meaningful way with its local stakeholders.
Object
London Southend Airport and Environs Joint Area Action Plan Submission Document
Representation ID: 32185
Received: 28/03/2013
Respondent: Miss Maureen Lamb
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The policy to expand the airport serves as an example of unsound unsustainable and irresponsible development. The JAAP supports the precise opposite of the "evidence based" policy. The local population oppose it and I oppose it as we are suffering very real misery as a result of the callous and negligent actions of Rochford and Southend council.
Southend airport has more housing in its immediate vicinity than any other UK regional airport, It is grossly misleading for the JAAP document to suggest that the local councils have done anything to limit or reduce the number of people who suffer from aircraft noise. Indeed Mrs Lucas-Gill has told me in writing that there is nothing she can do to help and has advised me to claim compensation. I have also written directly to Southend Council who have given me the same messages.
I firmly believe the local councils have failed in their duty of care to the local population by doing everything in their power to reduce flights and noise. It is a disgraceful and harmful decision to allow night flights which poses a risk to health of the people who now have to suffer absolute misery caused by the irresponsible and callous expansion of the airport.
This document is unsound it is based on a series of false assumptions, including the claim that it will create jobs and that the airport is in any way sustainable.
In the first year of operations at southend airport it states that 500 jobs were created however I understand that around half of these were transferred from Stanstead so yet again more misery for workers who lost or had to move jobs and yet more lies from the Council.
No mention has also been made of the £millions being lost from local homeowners/voters and tax payers who's properties have been substantially devalued because of the airport & associated noise and pollution. This shows the utter contempt and lack of respect that the councils have for the local population by not listening or taking action with very real issues.
I understand that the last JAAP had 80% of respondents voting against the expansion and high growth and an opinion poll recently had 61% of local people opposed to expansion so I am stunned that the councils are still progressing with this plan when nobody supports this locally - are you listening to the local voters at all council men snd women???
Object
London Southend Airport and Environs Joint Area Action Plan Submission Document
Representation ID: 32194
Received: 02/04/2013
Respondent: Mr Michael Powell
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The policy to expand the airport serves as an example of unsound, unsustainable, irresponsible development. The JAAP supports the precise opposite of "evidence based policy". The local population oppose it but the two councils ignore all objections.
Southend Airport has more housing in its immediate vicinity than any other regional airport in the UK. It is therefore grossly misleading for the JAAP document to suggest that the local councils have done anything to limit or reduce the number of people who suffer from aircraft noise, pollution and traffic congestion. The councils have failed in their duty of care to the local population by doing everything in their power to increase flights both by day and night. The document is unsound, it is based upon a series of false assumptions, including the claim that it will create thousands of jobs. And it is impossible to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by flying ever more aircraft. The first year of operations at the airport indicate that around 500 jobs have been created, of which around half were transferred from Stansted. The councils have squandered public money on various facilities associated with the airport and the airport has stripped £millions out of the local economy by devaluing property near the airport and flight path.
The last JAAP process showed that around 80% of respondents did not want the high growth scenario for airport expansion and an opinion poll last year showed that 61% of local people opposed expansion. However,it appears that the original JAAP proposal was only a beginning because, since the runaway was extended and the new terminal built, plans have been passed for a further extension to the terminal and building is already in progress despite objections concerning sewers and de-icing water treatment. The original predictions of 2 million passenger movements by 2020 are now being spoken of as possibly 6 million!
Object
London Southend Airport and Environs Joint Area Action Plan Submission Document
Representation ID: 32199
Received: 02/04/2013
Respondent: Mr Michael Powell
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The policy to expand the airport serves as an example of unsound, unsustainable, irresponsible development. The JAAP supports the precise opposite of "evidence based policy". The local population oppose it and are suffering as a result of the actions of the two councils.
The last JAAP process showed that around 80% of respondents did not want the high growth scenario for airport expansion and an opinion poll last year showed that 61% of local people opposed expansion.
Southend Airport has more housing in its immediate vicinity than any other regional airport in the UK. It is therefore grossly misleading for the JAAP document to suggest that the local councils have done anything to limit or reduce the number of people who suffer from aircraft noise, pollution and resulting traffic congestion. The councils have failed in their duty of care to the local population by doing everything in their power to increase flights both by night and day. The document is unsound, it is based upon a series of false assumptions, including the claim that it will create jobs and that the airport is in any way "sustainable". Operations at Southend Airport are sucking money out of the UK economy by encouraging ever larger numbers of people to take holidays abroad. And it is impossible to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by flying ever more aircraft. The first year of operations at the airport indicate that around 500 jobs have been created, of which around half were transferred from Stansted. However an analysis provided by SEEFoE suggests that the number of tourists who travelled abroad exported around £300 million from the UK economy, which is equivalent to over 10,000 jobs lost to the Essex/London economy. Worse still the councils have squandered public money on various facilities associated with the airport and the airport has stripped £millions out of the local economy by devaluing property near the airport and flight path.
Object
London Southend Airport and Environs Joint Area Action Plan Submission Document
Representation ID: 32252
Received: 03/04/2013
Respondent: karen sutherland
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The policy to expand the airport serves as an example of unsound, unsustainable, irresponsible development. The JAAP supports the precise opposite of "evidence based policy". The local population oppose it and are suffering real misery as a result of the callous actions of the two councils.
Southend Airport has more housing in its immediate vicinity than any other regional airport in the UK. It is therefore grossly misleading for the JAAP document to suggest that the local councils have done anything to limit or reduce the number of people who suffer from aircraft noise. The councils have failed in their duty of care to the local population by doing everything in their power to increase flights and noise. The disgraceful decision to allow night flights poses a serious threat to the health of the people who now have to suffer absolute misery caused by the irresponsible and callous expansion of the airport. The document is unsound, it is based upon a series of false assumptions, including the claim that it will create jobs and that the airport is in any way "sustainable". Operations at Southend Airport are sucking money out of the UK economy by encouraging ever larger numbers of people to take holidays abroad. And it is impossible to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by flying ever more aircraft. The first year of operations at the airport indicate that around 500 jobs have been created, of which around half were transferred from Stanstead. However an analysis provided by SEEFoE suggests that the number of tourists who travelled abroad exported around £300 million from the UK economy, which is equivalent to over 10,000 jobs lost to the Essex/London economy. Worse still the councils have squandered public money on various facilities associated with the airport and the airport has stripped £millions out of the local economy by devaluing property near the airport and flight path.
The last JAAP process showed that around 80% of respondents did not want the high growth scenario for airport expansion and an opinion poll last year showed that 61% of local people opposed expansion.
Object
London Southend Airport and Environs Joint Area Action Plan Submission Document
Representation ID: 32258
Received: 04/04/2013
Respondent: Mr Syed Hussain
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The policy to expand the airport serves as an example of unsound, unsustainable, irresponsible development. The JAAP supports the precise opposite of "evidence based policy". The local population oppose it and are suffering real misery as a result of the callous actions of the two councils.
Southend Airport has more housing in its immediate vicinity than any other regional airport in the UK. It is therefore grossly misleading for the JAAP document to suggest that the local councils have done anything to limit or reduce the number of people who suffer from aircraft noise. The councils have failed in their duty of care to the local population by doing everything in their power to increase flights and noise. The disgraceful decision to allow night flights poses a serious threat to the health of the people who now have to suffer absolute misery caused by the irresponsible and callous expansion of the airport. The document is unsound, it is based upon a series of false assumptions, including the claim that it will create jobs and that the airport is in any way "sustainable". Operations at Southend Airport are sucking money out of the UK economy by encouraging ever larger numbers of people to take holidays abroad. And it is impossible to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by flying ever more aircraft. The first year of operations at the airport indicate that around 500 jobs have been created, of which around half were transferred from Stanstead. However an analysis provided by SEEFoE suggests that the number of tourists who travelled abroad exported around £300 million from the UK economy, which is equivalent to over 10,000 jobs lost to the Essex/London economy. Worse still the councils have squandered public money on various facilities associated with the airport and the airport has stripped £millions out of the local economy by devaluing property near the airport and flight path.
The last JAAP process showed that around 80% of respondents did not want the high growth scenario for airport expansion and an opinion poll last year showed that 61% of local people opposed expansion.
Object
London Southend Airport and Environs Joint Area Action Plan Submission Document
Representation ID: 32266
Received: 04/04/2013
Respondent: mr alan stuart
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Summary
The policy to expand the airport serves as an example of unsound, unsustainable, irresponsible development. The JAAP supports the precise opposite of "evidence based policy". The local population oppose it and are suffering real misery as a result of the callous actions of the two councils.
Southend Airport has more housing in its immediate vicinity than any other regional airport in the UK. It is therefore grossly misleading for the JAAP document to suggest that the local councils have done anything to limit or reduce the number of people who suffer from aircraft noise. The councils have failed in their duty of care to the local population by doing everything in their power to increase flights and noise. The disgraceful decision to allow night flights poses a serious threat to the health of the people who now have to suffer absolute misery caused by the irresponsible and callous expansion of the airport. The document is unsound, it is based upon a series of false assumptions, including the claim that it will create jobs and that the airport is in any way "sustainable". Operations at Southend Airport are sucking money out of the UK economy by encouraging ever larger numbers of people to take holidays abroad. And it is impossible to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by flying ever more aircraft. The first year of operations at the airport indicate that around 500 jobs have been created, of which around half were transferred from Stanstead. However an analysis provided by SEEFoE suggests that the number of tourists who travelled abroad exported around £300 million from the UK economy, which is equivalent to over 10,000 jobs lost to the Essex/London economy. Worse still the councils have squandered public money on various facilities associated with the airport and the airport has stripped £millions out of the local economy by devaluing property near the airport and flight path.
The last JAAP process showed that around 80% of respondents did not want the high growth scenario for airport expansion and an opinion poll last year showed that 61% of local people opposed expansion.
Object
London Southend Airport and Environs Joint Area Action Plan Submission Document
Representation ID: 32271
Received: 05/04/2013
Respondent: Mrs Catherine Theobald
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
There is far too much housing in the vicinity of the airport and it would appear that Southend Council have failed in their duty of care towards those near the airport and under the main flight path by allowing night flights and a proposed limit of 53,300 flights per year. The future of the airport is unsustainable, mostly due to insufficient allowance made to local infrastructure and insufficient attention paid to those who have objected to airport expansion.
There is far too much housing in the vicinity of the airport and it would appear that Southend Council have failed in their duty of care towards those near the airport and under the main flight path by allowing night flights and a proposed limit of 53,300 flights per year. The future of the airport is unsustainable, mostly due to insufficient allowance made to local infrastructure and insufficient attention paid to those who have objected to airport expansion.
Object
London Southend Airport and Environs Joint Area Action Plan Submission Document
Representation ID: 32288
Received: 05/04/2013
Respondent: Mrs Anne Mears
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The policy to expand the airport serves as an example of unsound, unsustainable, irresponsible development. The JAAP supports the precise opposite of "evidence based policy". The local population oppose it and are suffering real misery as a result of the callous actions of the two councils.
I object strongly to any further expansion. Our lives are now ruined, our house has devalued by £50,000, it is appalling that flights are allowed to be scheduled at 06:30-23:00 and that night flights are allowed too.
Southend Airport has more housing in its immediate vicinity than any other regional airport in the UK. It is therefore grossly misleading for the JAAP document to suggest that the local councils have done anything to limit or reduce the number of people who suffer from aircraft noise. The councils have failed in their duty of care to the local population by doing everything in their power to increase flights and noise. The disgraceful decision to allow night flights poses a serious threat to the health of the people who now have to suffer absolute misery caused by the irresponsible and callous expansion of the airport. The document is unsound, it is based upon a series of false assumptions, including the claim that it will create jobs and that the airport is in any way "sustainable". Operations at Southend Airport are sucking money out of the UK economy by encouraging ever larger numbers of people to take holidays abroad. And it is impossible to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by flying ever more aircraft. The first year of operations at the airport indicate that around 500 jobs have been created, of which around half were transferred from Stanstead. However an analysis provided by SEEFoE suggests that the number of tourists who travelled abroad exported around £300 million from the UK economy, which is equivalent to over 10,000 jobs lost to the Essex/London economy. Worse still the councils have squandered public money on various facilities associated with the airport and the airport has stripped £millions out of the local economy by devaluing property near the airport and flight path.
The last JAAP process showed that around 80% of respondents did not want the high growth scenario for airport expansion and an opinion poll last year showed that 61% of local people opposed expansion.
Furthermore, there is inadequate protection for Water Voles which inhabit Eastwood Brook to be protected from aviation runoff and pollution.
Object
London Southend Airport and Environs Joint Area Action Plan Submission Document
Representation ID: 32289
Received: 05/04/2013
Respondent: Stephen Murray
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
This highly rated 'Body of Evidence' requires a far more detailed investigation by interested & effected parties. It would require at least 12 months which is a fraction of the time it took to compile and fiscal funding from the council, who also expended undisclosed sums of public funds on compiling this dubious paperwork in the first instance.
This highly rated 'Body of Evidence' requires a far more detailed investigation by interested & effected parties. It would require at least 12 months which is a fraction of the time it took to compile and fiscal funding from the council, who also expended undisclosed sums of public funds on compiling this dubious paperwork in the first instance.
Object
London Southend Airport and Environs Joint Area Action Plan Submission Document
Representation ID: 32307
Received: 08/04/2013
Respondent: Hawkwell Residents Association
Agent: Hawkwell Residents Association
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Producing a heavy weight document that prevented printing and general distribution and expecting the public to fill in a complicated online response is an unfair method of consultation. I would also like to point out that I have clicked on Effective in the soundness Test section below as the website requires one to be chosen before it will accept my comments but I do not actually agree with any of these choices.
Producing a heavy weight document that prevented printing and general distribution and expecting the public to fill in a complicated online response is an unfair method of consultation. I would also like to point out that I have clicked on Effective in the soundness Test section below as the website requires one to be chosen before it will accept my comments but I do not actually agree with any of these choices.
Object
London Southend Airport and Environs Joint Area Action Plan Submission Document
Representation ID: 32314
Received: 22/04/2013
Respondent: June Stapleton
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The type of aircraft, runway size, over reliance on EasyJet and potential future greenhouse gas emission restrictions make this expansion a very risky venture.
The document states that "London Southend Airport must be able to accommodate new and future aircraft models that are quieter and more fuel efficient"
The description of the A319s currently operating from the Airport as the most modern and fuel-efficient is incorrect. These aircraft conform to chapter 3 of annex 16 to chapter 30 of the Chicago Convention. The specification for chapter 4 aircraft was agreed in 2006 and it is the policy agreed this year to aggressively replace chapter 3 aircraft with chapter 4 aircraft in order to meet commitments on reducing emissions. The replacement for the current A319 is the A319neo (new engine option). Both Boeing and Airbus are offering conversions by re-engining existing narrow bodied airliners to meet the new standard. The new engines provide greater fuel economy and therefore lower emissions of CO2; but are heavier, larger in diameter and produce less maximum power. This has the effect of increasing the takeoff run meaning that the increase in runway length has been negated. It also increases the landing weight and approach speed putting more impact load on the runway.
The operating costs of the A319neo (156 seats) and the A320neo (180 seats) are virtually the same and orders for the A319neo have dried up. Fewer than 30 A319neos but more than 1,400 A320neos are currently on order. EasyJet has no A319neos on order having converted their orders for A319s to A320neos, these aircraft are heavier and require a runway longer and stronger than that now at Southend.
EasyJet are said to be considering the Bombardier C series but only the CE100 (125 seats max) and CE300XT (145 seats max) could fly from Southend at maximum take off weight. The XT indicates extra thrust meaning the aircraft is over engined. The Bombardier C series cannot accommodate a standard airline freight container in its hold, and is therefore unlikely that this type will be suitable for easyJet operations. Airlines generally prefer a single soured fleet.
Of the aircraft currently using or proposed to use Southend, the Fokker 100, Boeing 737 600 series and Boeing 717 are chapter 3 aircraft. The Embraer 195 is a chapter 3 aircraft and requires a runway of 2,179 metres at maximum takeoff weight. Only the turboprop aircraft operating from the Airport such as the ATR 52/72 of Aer Arran have chapter 4 compliance. Correct decisions cannot be based on false or misleading information. The councils rely too heavily of the Airport for aviation related advice and this is heavily tainted by self interest.
The vast majority of passengers flying from London Southend Airport are seasonal holidaymakers. It is the current policy of EasyJet to move its passenger profile away from holiday traffic to the more lucrative business travellers. To this end they have introduced allocated seating and some seating with increased legroom. Few if any of the routes currently being offered appear to have any potential for business travel. It would seem that the decision of EasyJet to come to Southend has more to do with internal politics within the company than hard economics. EasyJet moved to East Midlands Airport but left in 2009 citing lack of profitability of seasonal holiday traffic which included flights to Faro and Ibiza. Aer Arran has already abandoned two of its routes, OLT Express has gone into receivership and Air Maestrick has delayed a decision to come to Southend.
The aviation industry is committed to reducing the amount of greenhouse gas emissions from its aircraft. The move to Chapter 4 aircraft is part of this process. The elimination of stacking where aircraft circle aimlessly waiting to land will make an additional major contribution to this process of reduction. The further development of Precision Air Navigation by which an aircraft will fly under computer control via satellite link in the most economical manner and land immediately on arrival is part of this scheme. To ensure immediate landing on arrival the airports that will be permitted to operate in the future must have autoland systems it is unlikely that Southend Airport would be able to justify the cost of the installation and running of such a system, or that the location is suitable. The large number of small airports in the UK complicate the air traffic control system and without autoland systems they will be unable to fully participate in the programs to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and will be forced to close. The standard length for a regional airport runway is likely to be set at 2,500 metres unless there are exceptional circumstances.
The consultation document looks forward to 2020 without any reference to the developments in aviation that will take place in that timespan. In view of this the document cannot be considered to have been drawn up in a rational manner and is therefore illogical and unbalanced. It is a legal requirement that such a document must be balanced, as it is not, it is therefore unlawful.
Support
London Southend Airport and Environs Joint Area Action Plan Submission Document
Representation ID: 32316
Received: 09/04/2013
Respondent: London Southend Airport
London Southend Airport Company Ltd has been involved in the development of the JAAP and has been supportive of the overall direction of the plan. Section 1.6 will need to be updated to reflect the setting up of the Airports Commission and the publication of the final Aviation Policy Framework.
London Southend Airport Company Ltd has been involved in the development of the JAAP and has been supportive of the overall direction of the plan. Section 1.6 will need to be updated and could be headed 'National Aviation Policy Framework and Airports Commission'. The text could then note the relevant points from the final version of the APF and should also note that the Government has set up the Airports Commission, whose interim and final reports will emerge in 2013 and 2105 respectively. The recommendations of Airports Commission are expected to inform the preparation of an Airports National Policy Statement by the next Government which may have a potentially significant impact on Southend Airport.
Support
London Southend Airport and Environs Joint Area Action Plan Submission Document
Representation ID: 32324
Received: 09/04/2013
Respondent: Chelmsford City Council
Chelmsford City Council welcome the opportunity to comment on this document and has no objections or further comments it wishes to raise in respect of the proposals.
Chelmsford City Council welcome the opportunity to comment on this document and has no objections or further comments it wishes to raise in respect of the proposals.
Support
London Southend Airport and Environs Joint Area Action Plan Submission Document
Representation ID: 32342
Received: 10/04/2013
Respondent: Environment Agency
We have made a number of unsound representations throughout this document, but consider that some minor amendments or changes of wording, agreed with us, will allow us to remove them. We are happy to assist in addressing these before the document is submitted.
In addition, we find the 'Areas for Change', i, ii (a) etc., confusing and difficult to link with those which are later given full names, such as Saxon Business Park or Nestuda Business Park. We have provided comments on the policies themselves and have tried to refer them back to the relevant areas on the map.
We have made a number of unsound representations throughout this document, but consider that some minor amendments or changes of wording, agreed with us, will allow us to remove them. We are happy to assist in addressing these before the document is submitted.
In addition, we find the 'Areas for Change', i, ii (a) etc., confusing and difficult to link with those which are later given full names, such as Saxon Business Park or Nestuda Business Park. We have provided comments on the policies themselves and have tried to refer them back to the relevant areas on the map.
Object
London Southend Airport and Environs Joint Area Action Plan Submission Document
Representation ID: 32375
Received: 14/04/2013
Respondent: Mr Paul Russell
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The policy to expand the airport serves as an example of unsound, unsustainable, irresponsible development. The JAAP supports the precise opposite of "evidence based policy". The local population oppose it and are suffering real misery as a result of the callous actions of the two councils.
Southend Airport has more housing in its immediate vicinity than any other regional airport in the UK. It is therefore grossly misleading for the JAAP document to suggest that the local councils have done anything to limit or reduce the number of people who suffer from aircraft noise. The councils have failed in their duty of care to the local population by doing everything in their power to increase flights and noise. The disgraceful decision to allow night flights poses a serious threat to the health of the people who now have to suffer absolute misery caused by the irresponsible and callous expansion of the airport. The document is unsound, it is based upon a series of false assumptions, including the claim that it will create jobs and that the airport is in any way "sustainable". Operations at Southend Airport are sucking money out of the UK economy by encouraging ever larger numbers of people to take holidays abroad. And it is impossible to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by flying ever more aircraft. The first year of operations at the airport indicate that around 500 jobs have been created, of which around half were transferred from Stanstead. However an analysis provided by SEEFoE suggests that the number of tourists who travelled abroad exported around £300 million from the UK economy, which is equivalent to over 10,000 jobs lost to the Essex/London economy. Worse still the councils have squandered public money on various facilities associated with the airport and the airport has stripped £millions out of the local economy by devaluing property near the airport and flight path.
The last JAAP process showed that around 80% of repondents did not want the high growth scenario for airport expansion and an opinion poll last year showed that 61% of local people opposed expansion.
Object
London Southend Airport and Environs Joint Area Action Plan Submission Document
Representation ID: 32380
Received: 08/04/2013
Respondent: Mr I R Francis
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The area of the plan is excessive insofar as it relates to its northern boundary. There is not justification for it to include the high quality residential area in Hall Road, Rochford which in no circumstances could affect the workings of the airport or the ancillary commercial activities envisaged by the plan.
The area of the plan is excessive insofar as it relates to its northern boundary. There is not justification for it to include the high quality residential area in Hall Road, Rochford which in no circumstances could affect the workings of the airport or the ancillary commercial activities envisaged by the plan.
Object
London Southend Airport and Environs Joint Area Action Plan Submission Document
Representation ID: 32384
Received: 17/04/2013
Respondent: Mr Steven Baum
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The policy to expand the airport serves as an example of unsound, unsustainable, irresponsible development. The JAAP supports the precise opposite of "evidence based policy". The local population oppose it and are suffering real misery as a result of the callous actions of the two councils.
Southend Airport has more housing in its immediate vicinity than any other regional airport in the UK. It is therefore grossly misleading for the JAAP document to suggest that the local councils have done anything to limit or reduce the number of people who suffer from aircraft noise. The councils have failed in their duty of care to the local population by doing everything in their power to increase flights and noise. The disgraceful decision to allow night flights poses a serious threat to the health of the people who now have to suffer absolute misery caused by the irresponsible and callous expansion of the airport. The document is unsound, it is based upon a series of false assumptions, including the claim that it will create jobs and that the airport is in any way "sustainable". Operations at Southend Airport are sucking money out of the UK economy by encouraging ever larger numbers of people to take holidays abroad. And it is impossible to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by flying ever more aircraft. The first year of operations at the airport indicate that around 500 jobs have been created, of which around half were transferred from Stanstead. However an analysis provided by SEEFoE suggests that the number of tourists who travelled abroad exported around £300 million from the UK economy, which is equivalent to over 10,000 jobs lost to the Essex/London economy. Worse still the councils have squandered public money on various facilities associated with the airport and the airport has stripped £millions out of the local economy by devaluing property near the airport and flight path.
The last JAAP process showed that around 80% of respondents did not want the high growth scenario for airport expansion and an opinion poll last year showed that 61% of local people opposed expansion
Object
London Southend Airport and Environs Joint Area Action Plan Submission Document
Representation ID: 32388
Received: 17/04/2013
Respondent: Mr Kieran Kelly
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The last JAAP process showed that around 80% of respondents did not want the high growth scenario for airport expansion and an opinion poll last year showed that 61% of local people opposed expansion. Why are Rochford and Southend Councils recklessly disregarding the wishes of the electorate is pushing ahead with JAAP3 ?.
Southend Airport has more housing in its immediate vicinity than any other regional airport in the UK. It is therefore grossly misleading for the JAAP document to suggest that the local councils have done anything to limit or reduce the number of people who suffer from aircraft noise. The councils have failed in their duty of care to the local population by doing everything in their power to increase flights and noise. The disgraceful decision to allow night flights poses a serious threat to the health of the people who now have to suffer absolute misery caused by the irresponsible and callous expansion of the airport. The document is unsound, it is based upon a series of false assumptions, including the claim that it will create jobs and that the airport is in any way "sustainable". Operations at Southend Airport are sucking money out of the UK economy by encouraging ever larger numbers of people to take holidays abroad. And it is impossible to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by flying ever more aircraft. The first year of operations at the airport indicate that around 500 jobs have been created, of which around half were transferred from Stanstead. However an analysis provided by SEEFoE suggests that the number of tourists who travelled abroad exported around £300 million from the UK economy, which is equivalent to over 10,000 jobs lost to the Essex/London economy. Worse still the councils have squandered public money on various facilities associated with the airport and the airport has stripped £millions out of the local economy by devaluing property near the airport and flight path.
Object
London Southend Airport and Environs Joint Area Action Plan Submission Document
Representation ID: 32389
Received: 18/04/2013
Respondent: Mr Kenneth Craydon
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The policy to expand the airport services as an example of unsound, unsustainable, irresponsible development. The JAAP supports the precise opposite of "evidence based policy". The local population oppose it and are suffering real misery as a result of the callous actions of the two councils.
Southend Airport has more housing in its immediate vicinity than any itger regional airport in the UK. It is therefore grossly misleading for the JAAP document to suggest that the local councils have done anything to limit or reduce the number of people who suffer from aircraft noise. The councils have failed in their duty of care to the local population by doing everthing in their power to increase flights and noise. The disgraceful decision to allow night flights poses a serious threat to the health of the people who now have to suffer absolute misery caused by the irresponsible and callous expansion of the airport. The document is unsound, it is based upon a series of false assumptions,including the claim that it will create jobs and that the airport is in any way "sustainable". It is impossible to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by flying ever more aircraft. The first year of operations at the airport indicate that around 500 jobs has been created, of which around half were transferred from Stansted. However any analysis provided by SEEFoE suggests that the number of tourists who travelled abroad exported around £300 million from the UK economy, which is equivalent to over 10,000 jobs lost to the Essex/London economy. Worse still the councils have squandered public money on various facilities associated with the airport and the airport has stripped £mills out of the local economy by devaluing property near the airport and flight path.
The last JAAP process showed that around 80% of respondents did not want the high growth scenario for airport expansion and an opinion poll last year showed that 61% of local people opposed expansion.
Object
London Southend Airport and Environs Joint Area Action Plan Submission Document
Representation ID: 32391
Received: 19/04/2013
Respondent: Mrs Christine Jarrett
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The policy to expand the airport serves as an example of UNSOUND, UNSUSTAINABLE, IRRESPONSIBLE DEVELOPMENT. The JAAP supports the precise opposite of "evidence based policy". The local population oppose it and are suffering REAL MISERY as a result of the callous actions of TWO COUNCILS WHO OBVIOUSLY DO NOT CARE ABOUT LOCAL RESIDENTS AND COUNCIL TAXPAYERS WHO ARE PAID TO SERVE THE LOCAL COMMUNITY.
Southend Airport has more housing in its immediate vicinity than any other regional airport in the UK. It is therefore grossly misleading for the JAAP document to suggest that the local councils have done ANYTHING AT ALL to limit or reduce the number of people who suffer from aircraft noise. The councils have failed in their duty of care to the local population by doing everything in their power to increase flights and noise. The disgraceful decision to allow night flights poses a serious threat to the health of the people who now have to suffer ABSOLUTE MISERY caused by the irresponsible and callous expansion of the airport. The document is unsound, it is based upon a series of false assumptions, including the claim that it will create jobs and that the airport is in any way "sustainable". Operations at Southend Airport are sucking money out of the UK economy by encouraging ever larger numbers of people to take holidays abroad. It is impossible to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by flying ever more aircraft. The first year of operations at the airport indicate that around 500 jobs have been created, of which around half were transferred from Stanstead. However an analysis provided by SEEFoE suggests that the number of tourists who travelled abroad exported around 300 Million from the UK economy, which is equivalent to over 10,000 jobs lost to the Essex/London economy. Worse still, the councils have squandered PUBLIC money on various facilities associated with the airport and the airport has stripped millions out of the local economy by devaluing property near the airport and the flight path. The last JAAP process showed that around 80% of respondents did not want the high growth scenario for airport expansion and an opinion poll last year showed that 61% of local people opposed expansion.
Object
London Southend Airport and Environs Joint Area Action Plan Submission Document
Representation ID: 32393
Received: 19/04/2013
Respondent: Miss Marion Oliver
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The policy to expand the airport serves as an example of unsound, unsustainable and irresponsible development. The JAAP supports the precise opposite of "evidence based policy". The local population oppose it and are suffering real misery as a result of the callous actions of the two councils. Just WHO are they "serving" here?
Southend Airport has more housing in its immediate vicinity than any other regional airport in the UK. It is therefore grossly misleading for the JAAP document to suggest that the local councils have done anything to limit or reduce the number of people who suffer from aircraft noise. The councils have failed in their duty of care to the local population by doing everything in their power to increase flights and noise. The disgraceful decision to allow night flights poses a serious threat to the health of the people who now have to suffer absolute misery caused by the irresponsible and callous expansion of the airport. The document is unsound, it is based upon a series of false assumptions including the claim that it will create jobs and that the airport is in any way "sustainable". Operations at Southend Airport are sucking money out of the UK economy by encouraging ever larger numbers of people to take holidays abroad. And it is impossible to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by flying ever more aircraft. The first year of operations at the airport indicate that around 500 jobs have been created of which around half were transferred from Stansted. However an analysis provided by SEEFoE suggests that the number of tourists who travelled abroad exported around £300m from the UK economy, which is equivalent to over 10,000 jobs lost to the Essex/London economy. Worse still the councils squandered public money on various facilities associated with the airport and the airport has stripped £millions out of the local economy by devaluing property near the airport and flight path. The last JAAP process showed that around 80% of respondents did not want the high growth scenario for the airport expansion and an opinion poll last year showed that 61% of local people opposed expansion.
Object
London Southend Airport and Environs Joint Area Action Plan Submission Document
Representation ID: 32395
Received: 25/04/2013
Respondent: MRS DEBORAH IRONS
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The policy to expand the airport serves as an example of unsound, unsustainable, irresponsible development. The JAAP supports the precise opposite of "evidence based policy". The local population oppose it and are suffering real misery as a result of the callous actions of the two councils.
Southend Airport has more housing in its immediate vicinity than any other regional airport in the UK. It is therefore grossly misleading for the JAAP document to suggest that the local councils have done anything to limit or reduce the number of people who suffer from aircraft noise. The councils have failed in their duty of care to the local population by doing everything in their power to increase flights and noise. The disgraceful decision to allow night flights poses a serious threat to the health of the people who now have to suffer absolute misery caused by the irresponsible and callous expansion of the airport. The document is unsound, it is based upon a series of false assumptions, including the claim that it will create jobs and that the airport is in any way "sustainable". Operations at Southend Airport are sucking money out of the UK economy by encouraging ever larger numbers of people to take holidays abroad. And it is impossible to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by flying ever more aircraft. The first year of operations at the airport indicate that around 500 jobs have been created, of which around half were transferred from Stansted. However an analysis provided by SEEFOE suggests that the number of tourists who travelled abroad exported around £300 million from the UK economy, which is equivalent to over 10,000 jobs lost to the Essex/London economy. Worse still the councils have squandered public money on various facilities associated with the airport and the airport has stripped £millions out of the local economy by devaluing property near the airport and flight path.
The last JAAP process showed that around 80% of respondents did not want the high growth scenario for airport expansion and an opinion poll last year showed that 61% of local people opposed expansion.
Object
London Southend Airport and Environs Joint Area Action Plan Submission Document
Representation ID: 32397
Received: 21/04/2013
Respondent: Mrs Margaret Christian
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
This policy to expand the airport is unsound, unsustainable and irresponsible. The JAAP is the opposite of "evidence based policy". The last JAAP process showed that around 80% of respondents were against high growth in airport expansion, and also a local opinion poll last year showed that 61% of people opposed expansion,
Local councils have failed in their duty of care to the local population by encouraging increased flights and greater noise, and in addition allowing night flights.
The document is unsound based on false assumptions e.g. that 500 new jobs were created in the first year.
This policy to expand the airport is unsound, unsustainable and irresponsible. The JAAP is the opposite of "evidence based policy". The last JAAP process showed that around 80% of respondents were against high growth in airport expansion, and also a local opinion poll last year showed that 61% of people opposed expansion,
Local councils have failed in their duty of care to the local population by encouraging increased flights and greater noise, and in addition allowing night flights.
The document is unsound based on false assumptions e.g. that 500 new jobs were created in the first year.
Object
London Southend Airport and Environs Joint Area Action Plan Submission Document
Representation ID: 32398
Received: 21/04/2013
Respondent: mrs jackie hopper
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
local councils have not done anything to limit or reduce the number of people who suffer from aircraft noise & have instead subjected local people to a disgraceful increase in noise & pollution. 80% of respondents & 60% of local people were against the proposals & expansion of the airport. This JAAP document is grossly misleading in many of its claims and is clearly in contradiction of evidence based policy.
Southend Airport has more housing in its immediate vicinity than any other regional airport in the UK. It is therefore grossly misleading for the JAAP document to suggest that the local councils have done anything to limit or reduce the number of people who suffer from aircraft noise. The councils have failed in their duty of care to the local population by doing everything in their power to increase flights and noise. The disgraceful decision to allow night flights poses a serious threat to the health of the people who now have to suffer absolute misery caused by the irresponsible and callous expansion of the airport. The document is unsound, it is based upon a series of false assumptions, including the claim that it will create jobs and that the airport is in any way "sustainable". Operations at Southend Airport are sucking money out of the UK economy by encouraging ever larger numbers of people to take holidays abroad. And it is impossible to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by flying ever more aircraft. The first year of operations at the airport indicate that around 500 jobs have been created, of which around half were transferred from Stanstead. However an analysis provided by SEEFoE suggests that the number of tourists who travelled abroad exported around £300 million from the UK economy, which is equivalent to over 10,000 jobs lost to the Essex/London economy. Worse still the councils have squandered public money on various facilities associated with the airport and the airport has stripped £millions out of the local economy by devaluing property near the airport and flight path.
The last JAAP process showed that around 80% of respondents did not want the high growth scenario for airport expansion and an opinion poll last year showed that 61% of local people opposed expansion.
Object
London Southend Airport and Environs Joint Area Action Plan Submission Document
Representation ID: 32412
Received: 21/04/2013
Respondent: mr mark hopper
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
local councils have not done anything to limit or reduce the number of people who suffer from aircraft noise & have instead subjected local people to a disgraceful increase in noise & pollution. 80% of respondents & 60% of local people were against the proposals & expansion of the airport. This JAAP document is grossly misleading in many of its claims and is clearly in contradiction of evidence based policy.
Southend Airport has more housing in its immediate vicinity than any other regional airport in the UK. It is therefore grossly misleading for the JAAP document to suggest that the local councils have done anything to limit or reduce the number of people who suffer from aircraft noise. The councils have failed in their duty of care to the local population by doing everything in their power to increase flights and noise. The disgraceful decision to allow night flights poses a serious threat to the health of the people who now have to suffer absolute misery caused by the irresponsible and callous expansion of the airport. The document is unsound, it is based upon a series of false assumptions, including the claim that it will create jobs and that the airport is in any way "sustainable". Operations at Southend Airport are sucking money out of the UK economy by encouraging ever larger numbers of people to take holidays abroad. And it is impossible to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by flying ever more aircraft. The first year of operations at the airport indicate that around 500 jobs have been created, of which around half were transferred from Stanstead. However an analysis provided by SEEFoE suggests that the number of tourists who travelled abroad exported around £300 million from the UK economy, which is equivalent to over 10,000 jobs lost to the Essex/London economy. Worse still the councils have squandered public money on various facilities associated with the airport and the airport has stripped £millions out of the local economy by devaluing property near the airport and flight path.
The last JAAP process showed that around 80% of respondents did not want the high growth scenario for airport expansion and an opinion poll last year showed that 61% of local people opposed expansion.
Object
London Southend Airport and Environs Joint Area Action Plan Submission Document
Representation ID: 32425
Received: 22/04/2013
Respondent: Mr David Hedge
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The policy to expand the airport serves as an example of unsound, unsustainable, irresponsible development. The JAAP supports the precise opposite of "evidence based policy". The local population oppose it and are suffering real misery as a result of the callous actions of the two councils.
Southend Airport has more housing in its immediate vicinity than any other regional airport in the UK. It is therefore grossly misleading for the JAAP document to suggest that the local councils have done anything to limit or reduce the number of people who suffer from aircraft noise. The councils have failed in their duty of care to the local population by doing everything in their power to increase flights and noise. The disgraceful decision to allow night flights poses a serious threat to the health of the people who now have to suffer absolute misery caused by the irresponsible and callous expansion of the airport. The document is unsound, it is based upon a series of false assumptions, including the claim that it will create jobs and that the airport is in any way "sustainable". Operations at Southend Airport are sucking money out of the UK economy by encouraging ever larger numbers of people to take holidays abroad. And it is impossible to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by flying ever more aircraft. The first year of operations at the airport indicate that around 500 jobs have been created, of which around half were transferred from Stanstead. However an analysis provided by SEEFoE suggests that the number of tourists who travelled abroad exported around £300 million from the UK economy, which is equivalent to over 10,000 jobs lost to the Essex/London economy. Worse still the councils have squandered public money on various facilities associated with the airport and the airport has stripped £millions out of the local economy by devaluing property near the airport and flight path.
Object
London Southend Airport and Environs Joint Area Action Plan Submission Document
Representation ID: 32431
Received: 22/04/2013
Respondent: Mr John Kitchener
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The policy to expand the airport serves as an example of unsound, unsustainable, irresponsible development. The JAAP supports the precise opposite of "evidence based policy". The local population oppose it and are suffering real misery as a result of the callous actions of the two councils.
Southend needs to be attractive to visitors. Few will spend money in Southend by arriving here by plane, and Leigh (a top 10 attraction in Essex) will be spoiled by noise.
The Airport has more housing in its immediate vicinity than any other regional airport in the UK. It is therefore misleading for the JAAP document to suggest that the local councils have done anything to limit or reduce the number of people who suffer from aircraft noise. The councils have failed in their duty of care to the local population by doing everything in their power to increase flights and noise. The disgraceful decision to allow night flights poses a serious threat to the health of the people who now have to suffer absolute misery caused by the irresponsible and callous expansion of the airport. The document is unsound, it is based upon a series of false assumptions, including the claim that it will create jobs and that the airport is in any way "sustainable". Operations at Southend Airport are sucking money out of the UK economy by encouraging ever larger numbers of people to take holidays abroad. And it is impossible to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by flying ever more aircraft. The first year of operations at the airport indicate that around 500 jobs have been created, of which around half were transferred from Stanstead. However an analysis provided by SEEFoE suggests that the number of tourists who travelled abroad exported around £300 million from the UK economy, which is equivalent to over 10,000 jobs lost to the Essex/London economy. Worse still the councils have squandered public money on various facilities associated with the airport and the airport has stripped £millions out of the local economy by devaluing property near the airport and flight path.
The last JAAP process showed that around 80% of respondents did not want the high growth scenario for airport expansion and an opinion poll last year showed that 61% of local people opposed expansion.
Object
London Southend Airport and Environs Joint Area Action Plan Submission Document
Representation ID: 32440
Received: 22/04/2013
Respondent: Mr terence white
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The policy to expand the airport serves as an example of unsound, unsustainable, irresponsible development. The JAAP supports the precise opposite of "evidence based policy". The local population oppose it and are suffering real misery as a result of the callous actions of the two councils.
Southend Airport has more housing in its immediate vicinity than any other regional airport in the UK. It is therefore grossly misleading for the JAAP document to suggest that the local councils have done anything to limit or reduce the number of people who suffer from aircraft noise. The councils have failed in their duty of care to the local population by doing everything in their power to increase flights and noise. The disgraceful decision to allow night flights poses a serious threat to the health of the people who now have to suffer absolute misery caused by the irresponsible and callous expansion of the airport. The document is unsound, it is based upon a series of false assumptions, including the claim that it will create jobs and that the airport is in any way "sustainable". Operations at Southend Airport are sucking money out of the UK economy by encouraging ever larger numbers of people to take holidays abroad. And it is impossible to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by flying ever more aircraft. The first year of operations at the airport indicate that around 500 jobs have been created, of which around half were transferred from Stanstead. However an analysis provided by SEEFoE suggests that the number of tourists who travelled abroad exported around £300 million from the UK economy, which is equivalent to over 10,000 jobs lost to the Essex/London economy. Worse still the councils have squandered public money on various facilities associated with the airport and the airport has stripped £millions out of the local economy by devaluing property near the airport and flight path.
The last JAAP process showed that around 80% of respondents did not want the high growth scenario for airport expansion and an opinion poll last year showed that 61% of local people opposed expansion.
Object
London Southend Airport and Environs Joint Area Action Plan Submission Document
Representation ID: 32442
Received: 23/04/2013
Respondent: Mrs C Mann
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
No evidence for proposed levels of economic growth anticipated. Complete madness to propose such a huge project during a widespread recession.
What will be compusorily purchased? Not clear from the JAAP but the boundary of the plan encompasses a church and some of the most prestigious houses in the area. The community will be destroyed. The proposed traffic infrastructure will barely cope with the additional traffic from the housing developments already planned for the area.
There is no evidence that this plan will attract the levels of economic growth anticipated by the councils. It is a huge gamble at a time of widespread recession. Complete madness. The costs will escalate on a project this size and no attempt has been made to show where this shortfall in costs will come from. I have always considered Hall Road to be the jewel in Rochford's crown an aspirational road which gives the town class. The JAAP encompasses some of the houses here and a church. Are these to be compulsorily purchased? If not then why are they within the JAAP area? The community will be destroyed by this over development and the proposed traffic infrastructure will be wholly inadequate. The councils would be better employed shoring up the existing infrastructure if it wants to encourage new businesses!