Contact us
Visit CPRE.org
Donate
Devastating impact of Heathrow expansion - our view
CPRE Kent has expressed its concern about the effect on tranquillity and the environment of airport expansion after the Government backed a third runway at Heathrow.
The countryside protection charity has campaigned against airport expansion at both Gatwick and Heathrow, in particular because of the serious impact on air quality and the devastating effect of aircraft noise.
“Aircraft noise brings misery to those living under the flight paths, including many people in west Kent,” said CPRE Kent Director Hilary Newport. “The importance of tranquillity cannot be overstated – it is the main reason why people enjoy the countryside, it can prevent stress and increases our enjoyment of exercise and play.”
CPRE Kent also fears the extraordinary pressure that will be placed on the environment and existing infrastructure around Heathrow. Thousands of additional employees and passengers will be drawn to an area of the country already struggling to cope with the demand for housing and transport.
“We cannot ignore the fundamental issue of environmental capacity,” added Hilary Newport. “We also need to think about the indirect stress on water supplies, the heavy impact on the environment, in particular wildlife habitats and countryside leisure opportunities, and effects on the resilience to flooding in a future of uncertain weather.
“Plus any additional runway capacity, plus the corresponding increased freight and car journeys to and from the airport, will damage the UK’s efforts to control its carbon emissions. Higher pollution levels, with their impact on health and habitats, are not acceptable for present or future generations.”
CPRE Kent calls for more efficient use of existing airport capacity; requirements on all operators to use quieter, less polluting aircraft and a national approach: using the existing available capacity at all UK airports to facilitate economic growth plans not further intensification beyond environmental limits in the South East of England.
Ralph Smyth, Head of Infrastructure and Legal at the Campaign to Protect Rural England, said: “Building a third runway at Heathrow would in itself take a huge chunk out of the Green Belt. But creating the biggest airport in the world on London’s western edge would have an even more disastrous impact. Pressure for extra development would be felt in almost every village from the north of Oxfordshire to the south coast, urbanising and industrialising swathes of our most precious countryside.
“The north-south divide has been increasing: by giving the go ahead to yet another runway in the south the Prime Minister has effectively pulled the rug on her own flagship policy of rebalancing our nation’s economy.
“It’s madness to be promoting domestic flights at the same time as investing in alternatives like high speed rail.”
Plus read CPRE Chief Executive Shaun Spiers’ blog on how the expansion will intensify the housing crisis here.
October 31st 2016.
- A number of important documents have yet to emerge. For example, a rigorous transport plan and a finalised air-quality assessment. The latter is critical given that allocations at Teynham will feed extra traffic into AQMAs.
- There seems to be no coherent plan for infrastructure delivery – a key component of the plan given the allocations being proposed near the already crowded Junction 7.
- There seems to have been little or no cooperation with neighbouring boroughs or even parish councils within Swale itself.
The removal of a second consultation might have been understandable if this final version of the plan were similar to that being talked about at the beginning of the consultation process. It is, however, radically different in the following ways:
- There has been a major shift in the balance of housing allocations, away from the west of the borough over to the east, especially around the historic town of Faversham. This is a move that raises many concerns.
- A new large allocation, with accompanying A2 bypass, has appeared around Teynham and Lynsted, to which we are objecting.
- Housing allocations in the AONB around Neames Forstal that were judged “unsuitable” by the council’s own officers have now appeared as part of the housing numbers.
- Most of the housing allocations being proposed are on greenfield sites, many of them on Grade 1 agricultural land – a point to which we are strongly objecting.
Concerns about the rush to submit the plan
The haste with which the plan is being prepared is especially worrying given the concentration of housing in Faversham. If the town is to take a large amount of new housing, it is imperative that the policies concerning the area are carefully worked out to preserve, as far as possible, the unique nature of the town. The rush to submit the plan is likely to prove detrimental.
As Swale does not have a five-year land housing supply, it is open to speculative development proposals, many of which would run counter to the ideas contained in the current plan. Some are already appearing. This is a common situation, and one that, doubtless, is a reason behind Swale’s haste.
Our overriding fear, however, is that this emphasis on haste is ultimately going to prove counterproductive. This is because it is our view that the plan, in its current form, is unlikely to pass independent examination. We are urging Swale to listen to and act upon the comments being made about the plan and to return the plan to the council with appropriate modifications before submitting it to the Secretary of State.
Essentially, this means treating the current consultation not as the final one but as the ‘lost’ second consultation.
The consultation ends on Friday 30 April and we strongly urge residents to make their opinions known if they have not already done so.
Further information
