London Southend Airport and Environs Joint Area Action Plan Preferred Options

Support

Representation ID: 12134

Received: 14/05/2009

Respondent: South East Essex Friends of the Earth

Southend has been crying out for a Park and Ride facility for years. This would be very welcome. However, were the runway extension to proceed, the location allocated is unsuitable as it breaches Policy LS5. Indeed, a large proportion of the facility lies within the existing Public Safety Zone. The solution is obvious: close the runway.

Object

Representation ID: 12137

Received: 14/05/2009

Respondent: South East Essex Friends of the Earth

In principle, green travel plans should obviously be supported. However in this case, this is nothing more than greenwash. As has been pointed out by other respondents, it won't make the slightest difference that people are walking to the airport (and is that really a likely scenario anyway?) when planes are taking off and landing every few minutes. Just as there is no such thing as a quiet plane, there is no such thing as an environmentally friendly one and to pretend otherwise is ludicrous.

Object

Representation ID: 12144

Received: 14/05/2009

Respondent: South East Essex Friends of the Earth

The SERT is an entirely separate project. As part of the JAAP scheme, multiple bus services (not just one as is suggested by the policy) should be provided in addition to SERT. It should also be noted that as this is *public* transport, it should be in public ownership. We have seen to our cost what happens when Southend's bus services are in private ownership - they are public services and should not be expected to turn a profit for the operator on every route.

Support

Representation ID: 12164

Received: 14/05/2009

Respondent: South East Essex Friends of the Earth

Policy T8 is to be welcomed on the condition that cycling facilities do not take the approach at junctions that is seen at the Fossetts Way/Sutton Road junction, i.e. that cyclists have to give way to all other road traffic. Motorists need to get used to the idea that cyclists' and pedestrians' journeys have equal priority to their own.

Support

Representation ID: 12177

Received: 14/05/2009

Respondent: South East Essex Friends of the Earth

The SERT is to be welcomed, but the JAAP can hardly take the credit for this. It should also be noted that there can be no such thing as "sustainable new development". By definition, sustainability is about living within one's means. Constant expansion, as suggested by the "new development" part, is therefore entirely incompatible with this.

Object

Representation ID: 12200

Received: 14/05/2009

Respondent: South East Essex Friends of the Earth

It is entirely unacceptable to reduce the green belt area to build unnecessary additional office space, industrial units, etc. There is a large amount of land in Southend that has previously been developed and is now either derelict or vacant. All of this land must be fully utilised before the use of any greenbelt land is even considered.

Object

Representation ID: 12210

Received: 14/05/2009

Respondent: South East Essex Friends of the Earth

Who, in their right mind, will want to use public open space that is immediately adjacent to what the joint councils hope will be a busy airport? This area should remain as farmland.

Object

Representation ID: 12212

Received: 14/05/2009

Respondent: South East Essex Friends of the Earth

This area should retain its existing function.

Object

Representation ID: 12214

Received: 14/05/2009

Respondent: South East Essex Friends of the Earth

The Saxon Business Park should not be developed - existing industrial and commercial facilities should instead be improved and fully utilised. Therefore, there will be no need to make any changes to the existing junctions.

Object

Representation ID: 12229

Received: 14/05/2009

Respondent: South East Essex Friends of the Earth

This policy is simply a joke. Doing a bit of landscaping at the roadside does not qualify in any way as an environmental policy. As has previously been discussed, the Saxon Business Park should not be developed.