News

Council planners support airport expansion

By Jack Sommers
October 26, 2009

PLANNERS at Rushmoor Borough Council have backed plans to double the number of flights going in and out of Farnborough Airport.

Officers have been studying issues surrounding TAG’s application to go from 28,000 to 50,000 flights a year such as noise, public risk and air pollution.

Councillor's sitting on the authority's planning committee will meet on November 11 to make a decision but the officers are recommending permission be granted.

This should be on the condition it is referred to the Secretary of State and a “package of improvements” is carried out, they said.

The report detailing what improvements need to be done and why it should referred to the secretary of state will be published on October 28.

For more on this story, see this week's News and Mail, out on Friday, October 30.

| View Comments (11)

« Previous Story | Next Story »

We are no longer accepting comments on this article.

Most recent user comments 11 of 11

Reply to "Aldershot born". Just think about the jobs it will create in the area: Fork lift drivers, baggage handlers, customs officials, etc. Adds weight to your mantra “The people in that area will never be satisfied”.

Kip, Southwood, Farnborough
11/11/2009 at 13:03

Oh well if they agree to go ahead with the airport then it won't be long till we have commercial planes flying in and out.

This is only the begining!

Aldershot Born
10/11/2009 at 18:31

Kip, I'd love a woven basket! We are looking for a rectangular white one for our newly refurbished bathroom.

Its Douglas
06/11/2009 at 21:51

Well the very least we should see is a green landing and take off tax imposed on each aircraft the proceeds of which can go into the borough fund towards reducing its carbon footprint. Starting on a pro rata figure of ten pounds for the first 5,000 increasing in stages to the 50,000. There is potential for quite a large sum of money to be made from those wishing to indulge themselves at a cost to others.

mai
06/11/2009 at 19:20

Quite right Douglas; What we think, say or want is irrelevant, decisions have been made regardless. Money talks etc.

Can I interest you in a woven basket?

Kip, Southwood, Farnborough
06/11/2009 at 14:19

Let's face it - its a done deal. The whole planning process is just a farce. RBC will face a substantial legal bill if they refuse permission - which is what they know they should do. It will go to appeal. Even if the appeal is upheld by the Independent Planning Inspectorate, some junior minister will overrule it (e.g. Lord McKenzie, a new junior minister in the Department for Communities and Local Government, overruled the (refusal) decision on the Pyestock warehouse).

What is the point of the local planning process and an ‘independent’ review body if neither has any authority when a junior government minister can overrule them.

Due process cannot work in these situations, so its understandable why direct action groups form.

Its Douglas
05/11/2009 at 23:37

Ah! We can be reassured that the secretary of state is going to consider the proposed increase in flights and the extra noise / air pollution, increase in vehicular traffic, and all other objections very carefully, and after some careful and deep thought with lots of meetings and deliberation, data / fact finding, including considering the increased risk to the health and wellbeing of residence in the immediate area, and increased risk of an accident over the population. After all this information has been assimilated, sifted, mulled over, discussed, analysed, synthesized, transmogrified, amplified, ratified, glorified, ingested and fully understood, THEN and only then, will he/she do what he/she is told and rubber stamp it!

God bless this democracy. Bring on the men in the white coats; I’m off to weave some baskets!

Kip, Southwood, Farnborough
03/11/2009 at 11:14

With 4,000 protesters ignored we're left in the hands of a Tory Borough Council, within a Tory County Council, with a Tory MP in RBC, surrounded by Tory MP's in Waverley, Guildford, Surrey Heath and Hart; all part of a Tory Party pledged to cut carbon emissions and to reverse the third runway at Heathrow. The outcome should be a refusal to TAG not the tearing up of the local 10yr plan - shouldn't it?

Glenn Morrison
02/11/2009 at 16:23

No, we do not remove any comments we may not agree with. Comments are removed or edited if there are legal issues with them or if they contain offensive or inappropriate remarks