Airport Master Plan for next 30 Years - Consultation

[superking]

Im sure its a case of any airport expansion in the UK which they might see as good business. The real answer to expansion is expand but not in my neck of the woods. Protests always start with people that has not many years ago moved into the area kick up about the airport or any project that might or might not affect people.

 

[kraktoa]

BBC news last night had a segment on a sit diwn protest by those opposing expansion plans. The group of about 50 were sitting on the floor inside the check in area. Many with placards and in fancy dress. It looked like a prearranged authorised demo.

Few of them were also interviewed by BBC local reporters.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

BBC news last night had a segment on a sit diwn protest by those opposing expansion plans. The group of about 50 were sitting on the floor inside the check in area. Many with placards and in fancy dress. It looked like a prearranged authorised demo.

Few of them were also interviewed by BBC local reporters.

There was a 'die in' at the airport on 18 January by a group of environmentalists who had previously done a similar thing at Cabot Circus shopping centre in Bristol. See below link.

https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/bristol-airport-extinction-rebellion-protest-2442341

The people I saw interviewed on the BBC Points West news bulletin yesterday seemed to be local people opposed to the expansion. I suspect these interviews were carried out last Wednesday because I saw Dave Harvey, BBC West business correspondent, the man who did last night's report, at the airport on that day. At the time I wondered what he was doing there and I half expected to hear of a major airport announcement.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Recent airport press release.

https://www.bristolairport.co.uk/ab...d-media-centre/2019/2/noise-insulation-scheme

£1.8 million fund for noise insulation to accompany airport development
Created: 12th Feb 2019

Nearly £2 million will be available to local residents living near Bristol Airport as part of an enhanced noise insulation scheme accompanying development plans currently being considered by North Somerset Council.

As part of proposals to increase capacity from 10 million to 12 million passengers a year by the mid-2020s, the amount available to households will increase by 50 per cent up to a maximum of £7,500 per property.

In addition, upgraded mechanical ventilation will be included in the scope of the scheme for the first time, enabling residents to keep windows closed in order to experience the full benefit of the high-performance acoustic double-glazing.

The current scheme, which remains open, has granted in excess of £200,000 to 70 local properties, but requires residents in the ‘outer’ qualifying noise contour to contribute 50 per cent of the costs of installation. Under the new proposals, grants will cover 100 per cent of costs up to £7,500 (in the 63dB LAeq 16hr contour) and £3,750 (in the 60dB and 57db contours). This is intended to encourage take up to ensure as many eligible properties as possible benefit from noise insulation.

James Shearman, Head of Sustainability at Bristol Airport, said:

“These proposals represent Bristol Airport’s most comprehensive noise insulation grant scheme to date and will see us supporting local residents with increased funding for a wider range of noise insulation improvements.

“This scheme goes beyond Government policy recommendations and will be amongst the most comprehensive and wide-ranging offered by a UK airport, demonstrating our commitment to reducing and mitigating the impacts of development on our neighbours.”

Local resident, Jackie Abbott, said:

“Having our windows replaced has made a real difference, making it much quieter – particularly at night.”

North Somerset Council is currently consulting on Bristol Airport’s planning application to increase capacity to 12 million passengers a year. This includes several other proposals relating to noise, retaining many of the current limits on night flying, for which the annual limit of 4,000 movements would be retained – although flexibility on the way this is allocated between summer and winter seasons is being sought. The overall Quota Count system, based on noise ratings for different aircraft types, will remain in place in order to incentivise the use of quieter, modern aircraft.

Bristol Airport is the ninth busiest airport in the UK and the fifth busiest outside London. More than £160m has been invested in facilities and infrastructure since 2010, contributing to Bristol being named ‘Best Airport’ in the 5-10 million passengers category at the ACI Europe Awards in June (ACI Europe represents over 500 airports in 45 countries across the continent).

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Glancing through a local newspaper for the eastern side of the Bristol conurbation I note that Keysham Town Council is organising a public meeting to take place on 25 February to discuss the impact of the airport's expansion plans.

The piece in the newspaper is headed:

Public meeting to discuss proposed increase in night flights - Bristol Airport

The piece itself then speaks of the airport 'seeking the lifting of restrictions on the number of night flights it currently operates'. This is not the same thing as a proposal to increase the number of night flights as suggested by the headline. The airport is not seeking an increase in night flights at all. It is seeking the ability to spread them across the 12 months rather than having separate limits for summer and winter which will be more flexible for operations but won't increase the overall number.

Many people will read and remember the headline.

One of those attending the meeting to answer questions is a woman from the Parish Councils Airport Association who has been a vehement opponent of BRS expansion for many years. The piece states that Bristol Airport has declined an invitation to attend. They also refused to attend a similar meeting organised by Wrington Parish Council a few weeks ago.

I find this a very peculiar airport policy. Local people attending these meetings will hear one side of the story and, knowing the views of the woman from the PCAA (views sincerely held I would add), it will be presented with vigour and without rebuttal. The airport needs to get its message out whenever and wherever it can.

Bath & North East Somerset Council has lodged a holding objection to the airport expansion plans as it is concerned about increased road traffic in the Chew Valley, an area for which it is responsible.

On a related matter, the group calling itself Extinction Rebellion that has already staged protests at Bristol Airport, Cabot Circus and outside the BBC to draw attention to climate change is organising a street party this afternoon at Stokes Croft in the centre of Bristol that will close the A38 there for at least a couple of hours. The Bristol Post reports that the group's main focus this afternoon will be the expansion of Bristol Airport which it is determined to prevent.

https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/bristol-traffic-stokes-croft-protest-2551521

 

[Jerry]

Maybe the lack of engagement with these groups is a sign of confidence that nothing will be able to stop the airports expansion?

 

[superking]

Maybe the lack of engagement with these groups is a sign of confidence that nothing will be able to stop the airports expansion?

Or get into a slangging match. At meetings like this you either have to be thick skinned or you don't intend.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Maybe the lack of engagement with these groups is a sign of confidence that nothing will be able to stop the airports expansion?

Or get into a slangging match. At meetings like this you either have to be thick skinned or you don't intend.

I believe that North Somerset Council will eventually agree to most of the application - there will no doubt be some curtailment around the edges - unless the application is 'called in' by the secretary of state. North Somerset's council is overwhelmingly Conservative-dominated and the airport is a major employer in one of the smallest local authorities in the country. The government's usual policy is to leave such decisions to local elected representatives and the previous major expansion applications were not called in. There could be legal challenges by opponents though but last time they got nowhere.

If the airport doesn't keep arguing its case it stands to lose the support of some local residents who might otherwise be sympathetic to the expansion if they were given a chance of hearing both sides. As it is the meetings will merely be a platform for the opponents of expansion who will obviously and quite naturally only mention those things that support their case.

I don't know whether the new CEO is deliberately adopting a different policy to that practised by his predecessor who would regularly speak to the local news media on various contentious matters including the airport's expansion and devolution of APD to Wales. The new man seems to have a low-key public presence.

 

[superking]

Seems like hes doing a low key approach as I have only seen 1 interview with him on tv. Someone from the airport should be out there putting the airports case on expansion plus many other points. As it is you only have a group of nimbys out there putting their side for no expansion and nothing from airport which does not look good.We keep going back to the Les Wilson days but he did things correct with promoting the airport People liked that and it kept a high profile of the airport. Where as today it looks like every body behind a screen and frightened to show their selves or say any thing.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Seems like hes doing a low key approach as I have only seen 1 interview with him on tv. Someone from the airport should be out there putting the airports case on expansion plus many other points. As it is you only have a group of nimbys out there putting their side for no expansion and nothing from airport which does not look good.We keep going back to the Les Wilson days but he did things correct with promoting the airport People liked that and it kept a high profile of the airport. Where as today it looks like every body behind a screen and frightened to show their selves or say any thing.

I wonder how Les Wilson would have got on in this corporate age. He was something of 'his own man', certainly a showman, but by golly he certainly rescued Bristol Airport which was in serious risk of closure (there were those on the council who thought it was too much of a liability) when he came in 1980 (or was it 81?). As with the Port of Bristol then the airport was city council-owned and both were drains on the rate payers' purse. What a transformation for the better both have seen since they were put into the private sector.

Les though worked entirely under the council's ownership, albeit in an arm's length city council-owned company after the government changed the rules on public ownership of airports in the later 1980s, until he was killed in a road accident in 1995. He took the airport from a quarter of a million passengers a year to one and a half million at the time of his death, and unarguably laid the foundations of the airport's subsequent spectacular progress.

Times have changed though and Les might well have found himself more constrained by corporate policy on all manner of things. Robert Sinclair, the previous CEO, is well versed in such things but managed to put the airport's point of view quite forcefully when he believed it necessary. Dave Lees is an experienced airport executive at senior level and I am expecting him to oversee further growth, although at present he is not as publicly visible as some of his predecessors. He's only been in post for just over six months so we might see a gradual change in his approach as time goes by.

The airport's senior management team as a whole has changed quite substantially in recent years too.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Timeline

When in November 2017 the airport pubished the consultation documents for the new master plan it included this statement.

After the consultation we will publish a report summarising your feedback and explaining how we are taking it into account.
Your views, together with further analysis and study, will result in a new Draft Master Plan, which will be subject to further public consultation in 2018.

The extensive public consultation was held in December 2017 and January 2018. After that a new draft master plan was meant to be published for further consultation towards the end of 2018. However, the airport then put in a second round of public consultation that took place in the spring of 2018 - I can't find any reference to a second consultation in the original consultation documents. Nevertheless, a second public consultation did take place and this has presumably delayed the publication of the new draft master plan.

There is more to it than that though because in December last year the airport submitted major planning applications to the local authority that would enable its permitted passenger capacity to be increased from 10 mppa to 12 mppa. Some of the detail in these applications relates to infrastructure expansion that might reasonably have been expected to appear in the still awaited draft master plan that was supposed to go out for public consultation. They appear to have gone ahead without waiting for the the draft master plan.

I can understand why they have done it because time is of the essence if they are not to find themselves in a situation where they are marking time at 10 mppa.

So when the new draft master plan is finally published will it now deal solely with the period beyond 12 mppa?

 

[superking]

It looks like the airport is doing what it wants in its own way with no public consultation and also the news from the airport.With that in mind it looks like the airport wants no dealings with the general public on any issues it has. I know a lot of news is a sensitive thing,but surely the general public likes to know whats going on. The state of the media does not help either as they only want to print bad news.The master plan has to keep every one happy with what they propose as the general public in many ways more or less dictates if the plans get passed or not passed.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

It looks like the airport is doing what it wants in its own way with no public consultation and also the news from the airport.With that in mind it looks like the airport wants no dealings with the general public on any issues it has. I know a lot of news is a sensitive thing,but surely the general public likes to know whats going on. The state of the media does not help either as they only want to print bad news.The master plan has to keep every one happy with what they propose as the general public in many ways more or less dictates if the plans get passed or not passed.

I am a bit perplexed about the December planning applications. The airport would have known in November 2017 when they launched the initial master plan consultation process that the 10 mppa limit was approaching and that they were very likely to have to submit planning applications to have it raised before the draft master plan was ready for public consultation, with any planning applications inevitably including elements of infrastructure development that had not been completely publicly scrutinised.

That said, a public consultation is a consultation and not a binding process. With some justification some people, and not just those who are naturally cynical, are often sceptical about any public consultation into anything that affects the public at large, whether by governments, local authorities or even airports. The feeling is that such consultations are no more than window dressing that give an illusion of public participation in decision or plan making, but really follow the Brian Clough school. When asked if he ever listened to the views of his staff Cloughie replied something along the lines of, "Of course I do, but afterwards I do what I was going to do in the first place".

 

[TheLocalYokel]

http://www.stopbristolairportexpansion.org

They seem to be getting themselves a bit more organised.

It's broadly the same arguments as the last time and really the same arguments that were used by opponents when BRS was seeking to expand from 1 mppa to 2 mppa over 25 years ago.

They are already asking the secretary of state to 'call in' the planning applications.

 

[superking]

Lets hope the planners takes on board the long standing argument side.With no new objections then it should be a breeze getting the plans passed.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Lets hope the planners takes on board the long standing argument side.With no new objections then it should be a breeze getting the plans passed.

As always and inevitably the SBAE argument is selective, and they accuse the airport of much the same thing.

They don't like the result of a YouGuv survey which found 70% in favour of expansion because it only labels respondents as South West based without a more accurate pinpointing of where they live. SBAE seems to think that the opinions of those from outside the area don't count, but that doesn't stop them supporting objectors who sometimes represent groups or organisations that are not South West based and in some cases international in origin.

Parking and traffic congestion is one of their main points. In support of this they say there is only one dedicated airport bus service. I presume they mean the 24-hour A1 Airport Flyer that connects the airport with Temple Meads and the bus station.

What about the A2 that is also a 24-hour service and connects the airport with central Bristol.

Or the A3 between the airport and Weston that operates for 22 out of the 24 hours each day.

Or the A4 between Bath and the bus station that operates for around 21 out of the 24 hours each day.

Not forgetting the South West Falcon that connects the airport with Plymouth, Exeter, Taunton and points in between again with a 24-hour service with 19 return trips each day.

Then there is National Express 216 that operates ten return services each day between the airport and Cardiff and Newport.

There is even the A5 village bus that serves local villages and the airport.

I have no doubt that some of SBAE's points are valid but when they introduce blatantly factually incorrect statements their case is weakened.

SBAE is also not best pleased with John Penrose, Conservative MP for Weston, who wrote to the secretary of state asking him to consider 'calling in' the planning applications but, SBAE feels, in a lukewarm manner.

 

[Coathanger16]

They don't like the result of a YouGuv survey which found 70% in favour of expansion because it only labels respondents as South West based without a more accurate pinpointing of where they live. SBAE seems to think that the opinions of those from outside the area don't count, but that doesn't stop them supporting objectors who sometimes represent groups or organisations that are not South West based and in some cases international in origin.

The opposition groups around Heathrow (and likely most airports) are much the same.

On the one hand they question the validity of anybody that supports Heathrow expansion who isn't "local", but then claim communities are affected by Heathrow up to 50 miles away (hardly local surely?).

They're perfectly fine with having support against expansion from people as far away as Australia, yet if you live more than 20 miles from Heathrow your support of expansion is invalid!

If you state your support for expansion, they'll fob you off as being either someone who works at LHR or in the industry, or even that money (bribery) is in play! You get accused of falling for the airport propaganda and essentially too stupid to think for yourself - "if you had a brain you'd see things the way we do" kind of attitude.

They vilify the industry and its supporters for just existing and then wonder why airports/industry seldom consult. If the industry does consult, they accuse them of making the consultations brief, biased & inconsequential!

I appreciate for some people, airports and any potential expansion can be unbearable, but their attitude towards anyone who doesn't agree with them entirely makes it impossible to have any kind of engagement with them.

Rant over - apologies for the post not exactly being Bristol related

 

[TheLocalYokel]

For a formal comment on the planning application process you have to give your full address which then becomes a matter of public record available to anyone. Whilst most environmentalists will remain within the law even when objecting to things like airport expansion, there is a fringe that goes in for direct action and a smaller fringe that can only be described as eco-terrorists. They have been known to use violence or cause serious criminal damage including arson towards people against whom they have serious environmental issues.

I can understand why some people who might want to support airport expansion, even a small regional airport such as Bristol, might be worried at the thought of their address finding its way to such people or groups and will understandably hang back when it comes to publicly backing airport development.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

The latest SBAE tactic is to support the growth of Cardiff Airport by backing the Welsh Government's call for APD devolution. It reproduced an article on the subject that appears on the the Nation.Cymru website. SBAE doesn't want BRS turned into a hub airport and believes that the growth of CWL, which it describes as a regional airport, should go ahead and that 'Bristol Airport depends on government favours in its battle with Cardiff'. I suppose the counter-claim in the event of APD being devolved to Wales would be that CWL depends on government favours in its battle with BRS. BRS a hub airport? Now I haven't heard it described in that way before. I wonder if SBAE knows what a hub airport is.

If BRS stagnated and CWL grew, there would still be more flights that increased the volume of UK emissions, which is one of the main planks of SBAE's objections to BRS expansion. What SBAE is really saying is that it doesn't actually care about airport expansion elsewhere as long as its local airport is reined in. Incidentally, the previous SBAE incarnation unsuccessfully used the BRS-CWL argument when the major expansion plans were approved in 2011.

It says, correctly, that BRS is loss-making when measured against its aviation activities and mentions in particular the money it earns from car parking. What is doesn't say, perhaps it doesn't know, is that this is the business model for most smaller airports, with ancillary revenue streams such as car parking and retail replacing the traditional means of airport income via charges to airlines.

SBAE also wants a small number of airport park and ride sites outside the Green Belt, ie away from the North Somerset area and that could only be in Bristol itself. It thinks that BRS is a predator and is not interested in bringing about a public transport system that would see its car parking income reduce. The fact that the airport has seven regular bus services, most running either 24 hours a day or nearly so, with two operated by the airport, together with its contribution of the lion's share of a £600,000 study with the local authority into ways of increasing public transport connectivity makes this assertion questionable at the very least.,

In practice, the idea of having dedicated airport park and rides outside the Green Belt is a non-starter. Bristol only has three P & R sites because there is always such an outcry from locals when another is proposed somewhere. However, the idea is in line with SBAE's desire to move everything connected with the airport away from North Somerset. No doubt some of those who support SBAE are amongst the people who have joined the move to have the proposed 'new town' around Churchill and district (that's a few miles south of the airport) built on the edge of Bristol instead.

Having voiced its disapproval of the Weston MP's 'lukewarm' support for the idea of asking the secretary of state to 'call in' the current application, SBAE has now turned its focus on to the leader of North Somerset Council. Apparently he was on BBC Radio Bristol recently (I missed that) telling listeners what an asset BRS is. SBAE wants people to contact him to point out the error of his ways.

It's becoming more and more apparent that SBAE is not the knight in shining armour riding to the rescue of the environment that it wants to portray. It's a leading local 'Nimby' Club.

 

[Coathanger16]

It's interesting that most of these groups call on others to tell politicians/councils/etc about their opposition to a particular airport expanding. Perhaps suggests that these groups aren't as large, and therefore persuasive, as they'd like others to believe...