NEW CAMBRIDGE FLIGHT PATH ASSOCIATION
Meeting Thursday 28 Nov '02, 8pm
at St. Stephen's Hall, Coldham's Lane round about (opp. Sainsbury's)
This Inaugural Meeting of the Cambridge Flight Path Association will be held
Everyone living under the Flight Path or nearby, or anyone with an interest in this specific area, is invited to join the Association and attend meetings.
The objective of the Association is to speak on behalf of all the people living under the Flight Path, or affected by air-craft movements in Cambridge; to promote discussion between interested parties; to engage with Local Authorities; to gather and distribute information to all residents and members.
Subjects of special concern are:- the PSZ; House Prices; Safety; Emergency Services; Noise Pollution; Air Quality; Environmental Impact; Health Issues; Fuel Dumping etc.
Apologies for Absence (Tel: 01223 249003, leaving name, address and phone no.)
Special Representatives - Legal
- Safety and Risk Assessment
- Emergency Services
- Health and Air Quality
- Environmental Impact
- Noise Pollution
- Estate Agents
Number of Meetings to be held in one year for Members/Committee
Representation at Consultative Committee Meetings
Any Other Business
Date and venue of next meeting.
Marshall's have made a Planning Application to build a new passenger terminal, which they say will service 15,000 additional 'aircraft movements' (ie flights) a year, including large jet aircraft such as Boeing 737 and 757. This could be only the beginning of greater expansion. If you wish to object you should write, URGENTLY, to
Michael Monk, Chief Planning Officer
South Cambridgeshire District Council
9/11 Hills Road
Cambridge, CB2 1PB
It is also very important to write to the following MPs and your local Councillors:
Anne Campbell MP,
The House of Commons,
London, SW1A 0AA
Judith Pinnington, Cambridge City Council
Cambridge, CB2 3QJ
Andrew Lansley CBE MP,
153 St Neots Road,
Hardwick, Cambridge, CB3 7QJ
Jean Hughes, Chair South Cambs Planning
50 High St
Coton, CB3 7PL
Although an expansion of the airport might be profitable for Marshall's, it would not bring net economic benefits to Cambridge and the wider region as a whole. Cambridge would have to bear considerable social and environmental costs. These will have long term negative economic effects. Noise pollution is not merely an irritation; there are many schools and colleges in the flight path. Research at Cornell University in the USA and elsewhere shows that regular disturbance by aircraft noise seriously impairs learning. The development plans for thousands of passengers a day, which would greatly increase the existing traffic congestion and air pollution. Added to the jet emissions this would create serious health hazards. Stansted already serves the region, and Marshall's would provide an advantage only to relatively few passengers. When these marginal benefits are set against the overall economic social and environmental costs to the region, it makes little sense for Marshall's to compete with Stansted and to duplicate its excellent accessible services. If this were an application to build a completely new airport in this densely populated location, it seems unlikely that it would be approved. Any decision on Marshall's plans should await the outcome of the ongoing planning process on the regions needs and proper democratic and accountable consultation.
The South Cambs Planning Committee will decide in July / August 2002
The deadline for posting objections is likely to be postponed as well to around July '02
Statement by the chairwoman of the planning committee on 5 June '02:
"Planning Application No. 1 - Marshalls Aerospace the planning committee has taken the decision to withdraw this item from today's agenda.
I do this in order to retain public confidence in the Planning System.
. . .
SCDC is in the position of having to determine a planning application
whose main impace( if there is any impact) will be felt within the
boundary's of another local authority - in this case Cambridge City.
Also the response we have received from Parish Councils have only
commented on the principle of a replacement passenger terminal but not
on any conditions attached to it.
We have all received a lot of correspondance regarding this application.
It has become clear to me however that there has been a lot of
misunderstanding circulating. This I beleive has come about because the
actual application itself was unclear as to its intentions and when you
receive a letter from someone objecting to an extension to the runway
and another suggesting that if we allow 15,000 movements per annum this
will be similar to those at London Heathrow you realise the extent of
Consultation must be based on the facts of the case with a proper
understanding of the environmental impact.
We shall therefore be inviting the applicants to carry out an
Environmental Impact Assessment and to submit an Environmental
Statement, which will:
better inform the Committee of the environmental and surface
transport implications of varying levels of passenger aircraft
movements, of types of aircraft movements and of hours of aircraft
better inform consultees and the public in reaching their considered
help Committee to reach a judgement as to whether a noise
amelioration scheme can and should be implemented at Cambridge Airport.
In addition we will hope to use the services of our usual noise
consultant Mr. Michael House to advise us on the way forward.
We shall also discuss with the City Council the best way of consulting
Cambridge residents and how to put the fact before them in a clear and