Third Heathrow runway is best solution to aviation logjam, says airport's owners
 |
|
Heathrow proposes three potential sites for the third runway and says plans would cost £14bn-£18bn. |
A three runway Heathrow, handling 130 million passengers a year is the solution to Britain’s aviation logjam, the airport’s owners have said.
Heathrow’s proposals, which have been presented to the Davies Commission
examining hub capacity in the South East, could eventually see a fourth
runway being added to the airport.
The blueprint unveiled on Wedesday, proposes three potential sites for the
third runway, two of which would be to the west of the existing airport.
Heathrow says the plans would cost between £14bn and £18bn.
Heathrow, which is now owned by investors from Spain, Singapore, the United
States, Canada and Qatar, says its plans are the cheaper than any hub option
put forward by its rivals and Boris Johnson, the London mayor, who has
called for a four runway airport either at Stansted or on the Thames
estuary.
Gatwick, meanwhile, is pushing for a second runway, arguing London would be
best served by a constellation of competing airports.
Heathrow’s plans for a third runway were backed by the last Labour Government
but scrapped when the Coalition took office in 2010.
These proposals are, the airport said, radically different from those which
were approved by Labour.
It says the extra capacity, which would raise the number of flights at the airport from the current 480,000 a year to 740,000, could be delivered between 2025-9.
But the plans are certain to anger environmental and residents groups who successfully fought off the last expansion plans.
One option would be to place the third runway to the north of the existing airport. It is seen as the cheapest alternative but would have the greatest impact on local residents and inflict more noise on the community than the two others.
Building a runway to the north west would cause less disruption to residents and noise damage, but would take longer to build and cost more.
The third option, building a runway to the south west is the most complex and expensive, but has the least impact.
Although the plans raise the possibility of building a fourth runway in the future, Heathrow suggests it may not be necessary.
Crossrail - the line slicing across London from Essex, a rail route from the west and the proposed high speed rail link from London to Birmingham and the north would all enhance public transport access to the airport.
“After half a century of vigorous debate but little action, it is clear the UK desperately needs a single hub airport with the capacity to provide the links to emerging economies which can boost UK jobs, GDP and trade,” said Colin Matthews, Heathrow’s chief executive.
“It is clear that the best solution for taxpayers, passengers and business is to build on the strength we already have at Heathrow. Today we are showing how that vision can be achieved whilst keeping the impact on local residents to an absolute minimum.”
Already opponents gave Heathrow a taste of the opposition it is likely to face as it pushes the case for expansion.
“We will fight any proposal for a new runway tooth and nail. We owe it to future generations to stop a third runway,” said John Stewart of the anti Heathrow expansion group, HACAN.
“While we are encouraged by Heathrow’s plans to try to reduce noise, the additional runway will put a 200,000 extra planes a year in the skies over London and the Home Counties and will negate these efforts”.
Business leaders backed Heathrow’s plans. "Expanding Heathrow is the best way to solve Britain's airport capacity conundrum. It is quicker and cheaper than the other options, and far easier to get to for almost all passengers,” said Corin Taylor, Senior Economic Adviser at the Institute of Directors.
With quieter planes and steeper descents, it can be done in a sensitive way. Britain will miss out on the trade we need with high growth parts of the world unless we urgently expand our hub capacity."
Dr Adam Marshall, Director of Policy at the British Chambers of Commerce, offered his support.
“Businesses across Britain need the best possible air links if they are to deliver growth, jobs and investment,” he said.
“For that reason, we support the expansion of our global hub airport at Heathrow, as well as new runways at other airports in the South East, such as Gatwick and Stansted.
“All three airports have private-sector investors who stand ready to invest in increased capacity, which is absolutely critical at a time of public-sector financial constraint.” But Boris Johnson, London's mayor, dismissed the proposals.
"There are absolutely no circumstances in which the expansion of Heathrow will be acceptable to London or of long term benefit to the country.
''Three quarters of a million people are already seriously affected by aircraft noise in their homes, and we cannot allow private profit to dictate a worsening of that situation.
''There will be more pigs flying than aircraft if we are to believe the claim that three runways at Heathrow will make less noise than two.''
It says the extra capacity, which would raise the number of flights at the airport from the current 480,000 a year to 740,000, could be delivered between 2025-9.
But the plans are certain to anger environmental and residents groups who successfully fought off the last expansion plans.
One option would be to place the third runway to the north of the existing airport. It is seen as the cheapest alternative but would have the greatest impact on local residents and inflict more noise on the community than the two others.
Building a runway to the north west would cause less disruption to residents and noise damage, but would take longer to build and cost more.
The third option, building a runway to the south west is the most complex and expensive, but has the least impact.
Although the plans raise the possibility of building a fourth runway in the future, Heathrow suggests it may not be necessary.
Crossrail - the line slicing across London from Essex, a rail route from the west and the proposed high speed rail link from London to Birmingham and the north would all enhance public transport access to the airport.
“After half a century of vigorous debate but little action, it is clear the UK desperately needs a single hub airport with the capacity to provide the links to emerging economies which can boost UK jobs, GDP and trade,” said Colin Matthews, Heathrow’s chief executive.
“It is clear that the best solution for taxpayers, passengers and business is to build on the strength we already have at Heathrow. Today we are showing how that vision can be achieved whilst keeping the impact on local residents to an absolute minimum.”
Already opponents gave Heathrow a taste of the opposition it is likely to face as it pushes the case for expansion.
“We will fight any proposal for a new runway tooth and nail. We owe it to future generations to stop a third runway,” said John Stewart of the anti Heathrow expansion group, HACAN.
“While we are encouraged by Heathrow’s plans to try to reduce noise, the additional runway will put a 200,000 extra planes a year in the skies over London and the Home Counties and will negate these efforts”.
Business leaders backed Heathrow’s plans. "Expanding Heathrow is the best way to solve Britain's airport capacity conundrum. It is quicker and cheaper than the other options, and far easier to get to for almost all passengers,” said Corin Taylor, Senior Economic Adviser at the Institute of Directors.
With quieter planes and steeper descents, it can be done in a sensitive way. Britain will miss out on the trade we need with high growth parts of the world unless we urgently expand our hub capacity."
Dr Adam Marshall, Director of Policy at the British Chambers of Commerce, offered his support.
“Businesses across Britain need the best possible air links if they are to deliver growth, jobs and investment,” he said.
“For that reason, we support the expansion of our global hub airport at Heathrow, as well as new runways at other airports in the South East, such as Gatwick and Stansted.
“All three airports have private-sector investors who stand ready to invest in increased capacity, which is absolutely critical at a time of public-sector financial constraint.” But Boris Johnson, London's mayor, dismissed the proposals.
"There are absolutely no circumstances in which the expansion of Heathrow will be acceptable to London or of long term benefit to the country.
''Three quarters of a million people are already seriously affected by aircraft noise in their homes, and we cannot allow private profit to dictate a worsening of that situation.
''There will be more pigs flying than aircraft if we are to believe the claim that three runways at Heathrow will make less noise than two.''
No comments:
Post a Comment