Uttlesford District Council's Response on Post 25mppa Growth At Stansted Airport

Written by Cllr Alan Dean on Sun 1st Jan 2006

Following press reports I have been asked about the attached document that was approved unanimously by Uttlesford Council last week. I thought I would send it more widely as many of you on my email list are involved in the same quest to ensure that Stansted Airport only grows if it can do so sustainably against environmental, social and economic measures.

This statement is very much one of principles and not detailed measures. A more detailed definition of what I have called a 'line in the sand' will, I hope, follow in the first quarter of 2006.

This was not all my own work by any means. The basis of UDC's response was a council officer report based on earlier comments from council members. I took that report and beefed it up in consultation with a few members and community activists. I remain of the view that there is an enormous wealth of expertise out there amongst you all that has and will continue to inform this debate. Your opinions are always welcomed by me and my colleagues.

Regards,

Cllr. Alan Dean

The response in full:

APPROVED BY THE COUNCIL FROM THE STANSTED AIRPORT ADVISORY PANEL WITH AMENDMENTS

That the Council's formal response to BAA be as follows:

The Council's Resolution of 13 December 2005, which takes full account of the report of community research commissioned by the Council, supersedes the interim views as discussed at the Stansted Airport Advisory Panel on 24 October, which were communicated to BAA to met its 31 October deadline.

The Council:

a) Maintains its position as set out in its response to the Department for Transport consultation on the Future Development of Air Transport in the UK that growth in air travel is incompatible with the Government's carbon emissions reduction obligations. This has recently been strengthened by the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research report "Decarbonising the UK" published September 2005, which stresses that "if the UK Government does not curb aviation growth, all other sectors of the economy will eventually be forced to become carbon neutral". The Council will continue to press the Government to change its policies on air travel so that there is a coherent climate change strategy across all its departments consistent with the Energy White Paper.

b) Is dedicated to the Nottingham Declaration on Climate Change, which commits local authorities to work with central government to contribute, at local level, to the delivery of the UK Climate Change Programme, the Kyoto Protocol and the target for carbon dioxide reduction. This will support the recent agreement at the UN Climate Change Conference in Montreal that member states should work together through the UN to examine the way forward, including the process for fixing targets beyond 2012. There is increasing acknowledgement of the costs of inaction and the considerable economic, social and environmental benefits of action. The Council will develop plans with our partners and local communities progressively to limit the causes and the impacts of climate change, according to our local priorities. This initiative includes encouraging all sectors of our local community to reduce their own greenhouse gas emissions and to make public their commitment to action. The Council considers that Stansted Airport and its associated aviation operations fall within this commitment. The Minister of State (Climate Change and Environment) DEFRA and the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State, ODPM are signatories of the Declaration.

c) Is not convinced that proposals for greenhouse gas emissions trading in aviation in future years will be successful in achieving reductions on emissions associated with Stansted Airport and its aviation operations and therefore expects BAA to come forward with alternative proposals to reduce the current trend for total omissions at Stansted Airport to increase.

d) Notes the requirements of the 1998 Transport White Paper, The Air Transport White Paper, PPG13 and the draft East of England Plan to reduce dependence on the car as a means of surface access to airports and increase the proportion of passengers using public transport. It expects BAA to introduce a low car strategy at Stansted for existing and any future developments and invites BAA to relinquish some of its existing permitted public car parking provision.

e) Maintains its opposition to the principle of a second runway at Stansted

f) Insists that there must be further consultation opportunities for stakeholders and the public throughout the planning process.

g) Insists that BAA accepts responsibility for the impact of the airport on local services, such as public rail transport, and ensures that local services are not downgraded to accommodate the demands of airport-related growth.

h) Urges BAA to take very seriously the level of community opposition to its proposals for increased use of the existing runway and to desist from publishing proposals that they claim to be 'green' in their environmental credentials.

i) Criticises BAA for being unable to provide an opportunity to comment on the nature of the airport in 2015 that BAA is actually planning as the context for its proposals to increase the use of the existing runway and insists that all future plans are merged into a single Master Plan. This was one of the intended purposes of airport master plans. BAA is presenting a description of the Airport in 2015 that it does not expect to be extant in 2015.

j) Makes clear that it expects that any application for planning permission to increase use of the existing single runway must demonstrate that the environmental impacts on those living nearby will be reduced and minimised in accordance with the requirement to that effect laid down in the Air Transport White Paper Executive Summary.

k) Reiterates the need for detailed evidence to back up the assertions as to the effects of 35 mppa with no second runway stated in the Interim Master Plan and pre application consultation document. BAA will need to provide a robust justification.

l) Warns that it is inappropriate to use impacts predicted at 25 mppa in 2010, based on assumptions made in 2000 or earlier, as a benchmark for effects now predicted at 35 mppa in 2015. Information as to the current position is necessary from the community perspective, but it is also necessary to be able to compare the predicted impact at 35 mppa with revised assessments of impact at 25 mppa.

m) Requires that any agreement associated with any planning application for growth at the airport is related to airport activity as well as physical facilities.

n) Informs BAA that in advance of ongoing work from both the Council's consultants and BAA, there is little to say in response to BAA's cursory consultation material. The four Stansted area local authorities are taking a pro-active approach to BAA's proposals and have commissioned consultants to advise on airport economics and forecasting; air noise; and surface access issues. The consultants' findings will enable the authorities both to comment on the material to be supplied by BAA in support of their application for increased use of the existing runway and to advise on the outcomes to which BAA could reasonably be asked to commit before the application could be determined.

o) Reiterates the importance of the Scoping Opinion issued by the Council, which sets out advice to BAA on the information that the local planning authority considers should be submitted as part of the planning application. Notwithstanding the feedback BAA has provided on this advice, the Scoping Opinion as issued still stands.

p) Criticises BAA for missing an opportunity to present information to the community as to the effects of increased use of the existing runway, even within the constraints of an Interim Master Plan. BAA has failed to use techniques in addition to or instead of those more appropriate to the technical reports that constitute a formal Environmental Assessment. For example, it could have used other noise metrics besides LAeq to provide more information on air noise effects, as requested in the Scoping Opinion. It is already clear that air noise is one of the issues that most concerns communities over an extensive area and further work on assessing and explaining the impacts is essential.

q) Notes that there is considerable doubt that a second runway will be built within the East of England Plan horizon to 2021 and therefore requires BAA to provide a capacity projection for maximum use of the existing runway to 2021 together with environmental and health impact assessments, noise and air quality projections, a surface access strategy and proposals for road and rail infrastructure proposals for such level of usage on the existing runway,

r) Remains sceptical about BAA claims of the economic benefits of airport growth, especially as these claims ignore any downside factors. For example, concern has been identified in a recent report by EEDA about the welfare of immigrant workers in the East of England Region. There is no detailed evidence in West Essex on this subject, yet as a consequence of the prevailing tight local labour market it is known that the airport is reliant on the importation of labour. These and other social and economic impacts of airport growth should be addressed.

Appendix 1 Summary of Stansted consultation documents

Economic and social considerations

The Interim Master Plan and best use consultation document state that Stansted provides both national and local economic benefits. The local benefits are stated as:

• Employment opportunities across a range of job types and skills

• Opportunities for businesses to access a growing range of destinations, and potential markets

• Increased attractiveness of the East of England region for businesses wishing to locate in the area through the presence of and connections provided by a major international airport

• Tourism opportunities for in-bound and out-bound travellers: and

• Cargo facilities, particularly catering for express and next day deliveries.

Forecasts

BAA's forecast for total aircraft movements (comprising passenger, cargo, general aviation and other movements), air passengers and air cargo tonnage at Stansted in 2015 are summarised in the table below. The permitted number of aircraft movements (ATMs) is 240,000.

2004 Actual 2015 Forecast

Total Aircraft Movements ATMs 192,249 274,000

Passenger ATMs 165,652 243,000

Passengers 20.9 m 35m

Cargo Tonnage 227,451 600,000

Of course, any long range forecast needs to be treated cautiously, as the inability of previous forecasts to predict the rapid growth of the low-cost market at Stansted illustrates. While some new long haul services are expected (which also contribute to the cargo tonnage) most of the growth is in the existing low cost sector.

Airport Employment

In 2003 some 10,600 workers were employed at the Airport. There were 1770 passengers for every airport employee, compared to 860 passengers for every employee in 1998. BAA put this 16% per annum (1998-2003) productivity increase down to technological innovation, leaner low cost airline supply chains and consolidation amongst low-cost carriers. Almost a quarter of the airport's direct employees (24%) live in Uttlesford and 18% in East Herts ( previously 18% were in Bishops Stortford). Essex provides 59% of all employees and Hertfordshire 21%. Whilst much is made of the efforts to encourage workers from areas of high unemployment particularly north and east London, the numbers are small (7% from all of London and 6% from Harlow).

STANSTED AIRPORT RELATED EMPLOYMENT-EXISTING AND FORECAST

Airport

Employment

Forecasts 2003

Actual 25mppa

forecast

for 2010

(estimated-Aug 2001) 35 mppa

forecasts

for 2015

Direct on airport

employment 10,600 16,000 16,800

Direct off airport

employment 200 - 300

Indirect

Employment 1,200 1,130 1,810

Induced

Employment 2,880 4,110 4,540

TOTAL 14,480 21,240 23,450

The overall forecast increase in employment in total as a result of airport expansion 2003-2015 is about 9,000 jobs of which 6,000 would be on airport. The on-airport employment forecast is only some 800 more than that forecast in 2001 for a 25 mppa airport. Should the level of Bishop Stortford resident employees continue at a rate approaching 18% then this would mean an additional 1,500 resident based on airport employees living in the town plus a proportion of the indirect and induced employment.

Surface Access

BAA state that targets for the use of public transport (bus, coach and rail) for the surface access trips associated with non-transfer air passengers at Stansted were established when permission was granted in 2003 for further growth at the airport. These targets were for 37% public transport mode share by 2010 with a longer term goal of achieving a 40% mode share. The document states that the current 2004 mode share for passengers is:

Private car 50%

Hire car 3%

Taxi 8%

Bus or coach 11%

Rail 28%

BAA state that the latest CAA data for 2004 indicate that the target for public transport mode share has been achieved with 39% of non-transfer air passengers currently using public transport for their surface access journeys to and from the airport. BAA state that this level has been achieved by enhanced bus and coach services which have seen a mode share increase from about 6% in 2011 to about 11% in 2004. The rail passenger proportion of non transfer airport passengers remains at around 28% of the increasing numbers.

The percentage of air passengers arriving by private car has now fallen to about 50% and according to BAA the challenge for the developing strategy will be to ensure that this achievement is maintained. Total on site public car parking spaces are expected to increase by nearly 17,000, from 26,750 in 2004 to 43,700 in 2015, though of these 15,950 have already been permitted.

In terms of surface access by employees, a target for the maximum level of single car-occupancy airport employee vehicles was also established in 2002 and this was not to exceed 80% of staff driving to work in 2010.

The position that BAA appear to be putting forward is that because the forecast 25mppa position for 2010 was acceptable their similar forecast for 35mppa at 2015 should be as well. This, however, does not take into account that 2015 must be seen against the background of general traffic growth at 2015 and the implications of the Draft EEP proposals.

Rail services are to be 4 X 8-car Stansted expresses an hour plus a stopping train and Cambridge service once an hour. The proposal for 25 million was for some 12-car trains and longer platforms at Broxbourne and Stansted Mountfitchet but the new One timetable apparently make these unnecessary, though at the cost of unacceptable degradation to local train services. The rail capacity issue is a critical one that requires infrastructure investment. The long lead times and high cost for new rail infrastructure make it a key potential constraint on airport expansion.

BAA state that their studies have also indicated that airport related traffic will form up to 20% of the peak flows on any motorway and trunk roads near the airport in 2015. The impact of this on those routes and of traffic on local roads is not known at present.

Airport related Traffic Forecast

Time 2004 Observed 25mppa

(in 2010 as predicted August 2001) 35 mppa initial forecasts

Arrive Depart Arrive Depart Arrive Depart

Am peak 1,550 690 3,100 1,300 2,800 1,400

Pm peak 1,180 1,630 1,300 2,400 1,750 2,600

Environmental effects

The consultation documents cover the following areas of environmental impact: Air Noise; Ground Noise; Air Quality; Landscape and visual impacts; Biodiversity; Archaeology; Water Management; Waste Management; and

Energy and Climate Change. Of these, air noise is the factor that is considered to be the greatest area of concern in the context of full use of the existing runway.

BAA is relying on the use of increasingly quiet aircraft to lower the impact of air noise, but this will need to be set against the increase in flight numbers and the variable impacts of noise on different individuals and areas. Also, BAA assumes that 57 Leq dBA is an adequate threshold for noise annoyance using the 54 Leq dBA level as a sensitivity test. The four Stansted local authorities have commissioned consultants to assess BAA figures and develop alternative measures, which are being discussed with BAA in line with the scoping opinion.

Contour dBA Area Sq Km

Summer 2003 2010 (as predicted for 25 mppa) 2015 (now predicted for 35 mppa)

>54 n/a 72.7 61.0

>57 33.5 42.9 35.9

>63 11.7 15.4 11.6

>69 3.5 4.8 3.3

BAA state that 3850 people live within the predicted 2015 57Leq dBA contour, 1,000 less than that originally predicted for 2010 but 1,000 more than in 2003.

This, the implications for night noise and the proposed mitigation measures all need further consideration.

Amongst the ongoing work BAA have commissioned a Health Impact Study which is being carried out with the Essex Strategic Health Authority in consultation with Primary Care Trusts and other NHS interests.

BAA's attitude to the increasingly important threat of climate change is that it is an issue 'requiring multinational governmental attention rather than one that can be meaningfully addressed by piecemeal action at individual airports'. The contribution increased capacity at Stansted will make to global greenhouse gas emissions by enabling air transport growth may however become an issue for the public.