Representation by John Philip Davies
- Date submitted
- 19 June 2023
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
Luton Airport Expansion Introduction The world has changed since the proposal originally started several years ago. The pandemic led us to realise that we can stay in touch and hold meetings online, cutting the demand for personal and business travel. Brexit has meant less trade with Europe, further reducing business travel. The pandemic has created major supply-chain problems, sky-high shipping costs, and pushed up oil prices. Putin's invasion of Ukraine, sanctions, and the probable cutting-off of oil and/or gas to Europe, further raising fuel costs, has led the IMF to state that the global economy is about to enter a prolonged recession. This recession and the massive fuel costs will reduce the demand for air travel, as these costs are passed on to the consumer. The world has finally recognised that Climate Change is an existential threat. All now recognise that there is a need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions hugely. Air flights are massive polluters of the atmosphere. Everybody now recognises the need for fewer flights, not more, and will think twice about flying, and will seek cleaner travel methods. Advances in battery technology will not progress far enough to allow commercially-competitive electricity-powered aircraft in the time-frame of the proposal. Hydrogen fuel cell – powered planes are not going to become commercially competitive in the timeframe of the proposal. Luton Council has, itself, declared a Climate Emergency, and should be actively seeking ways to reduce flights, not increase them. The world has changed. There will simply not be the demand for flights that the proposal seeks to achieve. Passenger numbers In 2013 it was agreed to limit passengers to 18mmpa by 2028 (a promise which was promptly broken). Why is there apparently a need to go beyond this? Compensation Compensation should be due because of the increased noise and pollution levels for us affected areas outside Luton Council area. The proposal promises huge financial gains for Luton, but I'm in the Central Beds Council area, so will not be receiving any community benefits, other than a few scraps mentioned in the proposal. Free double glazing? We already have it. And it won't help us to be able to hold a conversation in the garden when flights go overhead. It won’t help if we want to leave our bedroom windows open during hot nights. There needs to be a substantial compensation payment for all affected residents. Environmental impact Luton Rising plan to build the new terminal on mature Wigmore parkland, and offer some farmland as compensation to the local population. But this is not comparing like for like. The farmland will take many years to mature with all the plants and animals hosted today on Wigmore Park. I oppose this plan as it will result in severe detriment of the environment. The destruction of Wigmore Park’s mature biodiverse leisure area is a major backward step. The proposal to mitigate the loss by substituting farmland is no substitute. The new terminal and hard standing should not be built, as it will enable the increase in noise and emissions levels for those, like us, living under the flight-path. There is a massive conflict of interest through Luton Council (LBC) acting as Local Planning Authority as well as being financial beneficiary via Luton Rising. This is sharp practice, and should not be allowed. Local road congestion Many travellers will continue to arrive at the airport either by personal transport or coach – mainly via M1 J10, and the road past Capability Green. This is already congested during the rush-hour, so will lead to further congestion and pollution. Luton Rising hope to increase public transport access, but this is highly unlikely to happen. The rail connection is strictly north-south on an already crowded commuter line. There is no east-west rail connection. Furthermore, fast trains do not stop at Luton Airport Parkway. It’s already very expensive to arrive by car to drop-off / collect travellers. It sounds like there is a plan to increase these costs even more. This will probably cause vehicle drivers to use Luton Airport Parkway station, for DART access, increasing congestion around the station. The Existing Agreement The existing Section 106 Agreement requires: • Operation of the Airport within its noise contours and 18 million passenger limit (also a 2019 Noise Action Plan commitment) • Production of a strategy to reduce the noise contours to defined lower limits by 2028 • Mitigation of noise through the introduction of modernised less noisy aircraft None of these things has been achieved, therefore it is inappropriate to expand capacity yet further. LADACAN As LADACAN state: “The overall effects on the environment, taking account of the aircraft emissions in flight, would be significant and detrimental. The additional noise impacts at source are not under the direct control of Luton Rising nor of an airport operator. Airlines choose which planes they will buy and fly, and fleet modernisation cannot be legislated. Luton has already experienced a problem with the latest A321 aircraft with more fuel-efficient engines, which are supposed to sound less noisy than the older types but in fact sounds just as loud. Pilots have suggested this is due to the comparatively short runway length. Therefore the community derives no benefit while the industry benefits from greater fuel efficiency. The Noise and Vibration chapter confirms that by 2043 there would be 70% more flights at night (between 11pm and 7am) and 50% more during the day. 30,000 people would experience a noise increase at night above the level at which adverse effects on health and quality of life can be detected. 3,300 people would experience a significant adverse effect. We agree with many local people that this as an unacceptable environmental impact, adversely affecting lives and well-being. The claim that the annual night flight numbers would be held constant at 9,650 is misleading since this refers to the ‘short night’ quota period between 23:30 and 06:00. Luton Rising plans to significantly increase the number of flights scheduled between 6:00 and 07:00 (the early morning shoulder period) and between 23:00 and 23:30 (a period where nearly all the flights are arrivals and are notorious for being delayed). There would therefore be a substantial increase in night flights (11pm-7am) which the brochure is not transparently clear about. Departures at busy times would start at 05:00 which is anti-social and unreasonable. Hiding such impacts in the detailed documents demonstrates that the public is right not to believe in the ‘good faith’ which Luton Rising claims to be showing towards communities.” The current limits and commitments should be fully met before permitting any new expansion. The proposal should not be permitted, and there should be compensation to those affected by the airport breaching its noise contour legal limits in 2017, 2018 and 2019. I oppose the expansion proposals. The Airport should demonstrate that it can keep within its existing and agreed noise contour legal limits before any expansion is allowed.