Representation by Andrew James Mills-Baker
- Date submitted
- 14 May 2023
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
I object to the further massive expansion of Luton Airport. I live c2 miles from the eastern end of the runway, c800m from the landing and landing path. I support the airport at its current size of 18m passengers but object to further expansion on the following grounds: 1. The project, in effect, represents the construction of a brand new airport next to the existing terminal with a new, much enlarged, terminal, taxi ways, extension of the existing apron and the relocation of most of the principal services, such as the bunkering facilities. 2. The airport is situated on the top of a hill on a constricted site, the first phase includes a massive earth moving project to extend the existing apron. The construction work will be intrusive to local residents both in terms of noise and environmental pollution and involves the destruction of Wigmore Park, a popular local amenity. 3. The airport and Luton Council have done little to mitigate the impact of noise pollution over the communities nearest the airport. They have failed to comprehensively deal with the continued use of old and noisy aircraft, particularly at night, and claim that it is not possible to prohibit night flights. The application contends that noise levels will fall as airlines introduce modern aircraft. This is consistent with previous applications but the subsequent evidence is that noise levels have not fallen because the airport and LBC cannot control airline fleet modernisation and there is evidence that many of the newer aircraft now in service are not significantly quieter than the aircraft they replace. 4. Recent expansion of the airport has included the construction of two multi storey car parks that have significantly increased the level of light pollution over the village as they have little or no light screening. The proposed development will undoubtedly significantly increase light pollution in a dark village (there is no street lighting in Breachwood Green). These factors in themselves represent a significant reduction in the quality of life in the village let alone other environmental issues at the airport and inadequate local infrastructure to cope with the increase in traffic that will result from increased local traffic. The suggestion that all these issues can be dealt with by "green controlled expansion" is risible. In my view, this application is an attempt to obtain unfettered future growth at a time when I seriously doubt that the project is financially viable and I don't believe that LBC will be able to fund the project. Particularly now, when the airline industry has so far failed to come up with a credible solution to achieve zero emissions and a growing number of people are turning to alternatives such as rail travel for short journey destinations, the principal market served by Luton Airport. A good example would be Amsterdam, which is one of Luton Airport's leading destinations, and is now served by an expanding daily Eurostar train service from St Panchras. I intend to make further comments as the examination of the application proceeds