PROPOSED LUTON AIRPORT EXPANSION !!!!
See also Kimpton Protection Group.
Following the great interest shown by parishioners in the airport's Master Plan in 2005, and the huge turn-outs at LLA's exhibition and the Parish Council's public meeting when Peter Lilley MP spoke; - not to mention the Kimpton 50 car-strong protest at the airport at the end of January 2006!, the KPG has now decided to form a special Luton Airport sub-committee to coordinate opposition within the Parish to London Luton Airport's proposals and to liaise with other opposition groups.
The members of the KPG Luton Airport sub-committee are;
Alan Cliff, Geoff
Curry, Tim Edwards, Gordon Glen, Lory Laski, Peter Liddell, June Lowings, Jon
Marsh, Adrian Martin, Hunter Peace, David Reavell (chair)
LLA's plans far exceed the proposals in the Government White Paper and will result in an airport second only in size to Heathrow resulting in the loss of 450 hectares of Green Belt and bringing gridlock to North Hertfordshire. Everyone in the Parish will be adversely affected so please support us by emailing our the KPG Membership Secretary, email@example.com to register your support and to enable KPG to keep you updated on the campaign. Following our Parish Flyer in February 2006 we have received a number of generous contributions to our fighting fund but effective campaigning costs money, so if you are able to help, please send a cheque payable to;
the Kimpton Protection Group c/o our Treasurer Tim Edwards 71, High Street, Kimpton SG4 8PU.
(click here to see...) KPG letter to Minister of Transport
(click here to see...) "Alert" pdf flyer, recently distrbuted to all Parish housholds. You can print this for display purposes if you want.
Please see also these web sites....
Don't let them take the Heart out of Herts!
!!!!!!!!!! Press Release: 25th June 2006 !!!!!!!!!!
Luton and District Association for the Control of Aircraft Noise (LADACAN)
AIRPORT PROTESTORS HAIL PLAN TRIUMPH
Communities opposed to the growth of Luton Airport won a significant victory when the Inspectors examining the draft East of England Plan last week threw out a policy which would have supported expansion of the Airport to 18 million passengers per year or more using the existing runway.
Speaking for residents group LADACAN, Roger Wood said: "We argued very strongly at the public inquiry that the location of the runway is unacceptable as it results in 'planes flying over large numbers of people's homes, many more than at other comparable airports.
"We would, of course, have preferred that the Inspectors agreed with us that the regional policy should oppose any further expansion at Luton but, given the Government's support for expansion, we recognise that they were unlikely to do so.
"Now that the Operator's proposal for a 2-runway Airport is in direct conflict with the Government's support for a single runway, at least we will be able to argue our case at a full Public Inquiry in due course. For now, expansion is on the back burner."
Notes for Editors:
The report of the Panel of Inspectors which carried out the Examination in Public (public inquiry) into the draft East of England Plan (Regional Spatial Strategy - RSS) was published last week and can be found at http://www.goeast.gov.uk/goeast/planning/regional_planning/ . The Inspectors recommend to the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, Ruth Kelly MP, that:
a) Draft Policy BL1, which "accepts"
expansion of Luton Airport up to the full use of existing runway, be deleted;
b) Draft Policy E14 (Regional Airports) be amended to acknowledge the Government's policy for Luton Airport as set down in the ATWP (see below).
The expansion of Luton Airport was supported by the Government in its White Paper, the Future of Air Transport, published in December 2003. This is often referred to as the Air Transport White Paper (ATWP). See http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_aviation/documents/divisionhomepage/029650.hcsp
The ATWP states (para 11.89): "The Government supports the growth of Luton up to the maximum use of a single full-length runway based broadly on the current alignment". It further states (para 11.92): "On balance, we do not support a second runway at Luton".
The Airport Operator, LLAOL, published its draft Master Plan for expansion in October 2005, in which it proposed a new runway to the south of the existing one and to retain the existing runway. The final Master Plan was scheduled for publication in early 2006 but is now expected to appear very shortly.
LADACAN (Luton and District Association for the Control of Aircraft Noise) is a residents Group campaigning against further environmental noise at Luton Airport.
LADACAN has always observed that
Luton is not ideally suited for an enlarged airport.
¢ It sits atop a plateau with limited options for a 3000m runway alignment.
¢ The amount of space for expansion is limited.
¢ It is the closest airport to a Town Centre anywhere in the UK.
¢ More people are affected by noise at Luton than by Gatwick or Stansted.
¢ It is surrounded by towns and villages which suffer major disturbance whatever departure and arrival routes are chosen.
¢ It has no direct rail link.
¢ The nearest motorway (the M1) is already overcrowded and will continue to be so even after widening
Peter Hunt 01582 733581
Roger Wood on 01438 833146 or 0777 615 3299
25 June 2006
Luton Airport Phase 1 planning application
We understand that the operator of Luton Airport, the London Luton Airport Operations Limited (LLAOL) is intending to submit to Luton Borough Council (LBC) its proposal for a significant expansion of the Airport (its phase 1). This proposal will allow expansion to 15 million passengers per annum (mppa), and LLAOC have mentioned figures of between 18 and 22 million in the past in connection with this phase. Whichever of the figures is correct, this represents a significant increase from the 5 mppa, which was the subject of the last permission, granted in 1998.
As LBC is the owner of the Airport it benefits financially from expansion and yet the LLAOC applies to LBC for this planning permission. Apart from the fact that this initial phase 1 application is not for the threatened second runway it does represent a huge increase in airport use with all the associated effects on our lives and so is something that should be given the widest scrutiny in planning terms. Additionally it seems unjust that the body to whom this application is to be made is the one who will benefit considerably from granting it. It is difficult to see how the LBC to take an objective view when they are considering this application. It would be far better if this application were subject to central government approval and is "called in". This would also place LBC in a position much less likely open to criticism regarding this application. "Calling in" means that the planning application goes to government for approval, or not, and is granted by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM). There is also then the possibility of a Public Inquiry, which means we would all have a greater say in what is approved. As this application is to be made soon, if you agree that it should be given a wider scrutiny then you can help by writing to the ODPM asking for this to be done using the reasons above. The address is:
The Rt Hon John Prescott MP,
Deputy Prime Minister and First Secretary of State,
Office of the Deputy Prime Minister
London SW1 5DU