Airport Master Plan for next 30 Years - Consultation

[TheLocalYokel]

With so many people expected at the airport planning meeting tonight North somerset have set aside a extra room for people to see it on screen. Also if you go to the north somerset web site they are streaming the whole meeting on line via u tube.I think that would be the better way as there will be no chance of getting in to the town hall.I believe it starts at six this evening,you might be able to clarify time on North somerset web site.

It is 6pm. See #315 above.

I shan't be watching - the same old arguments will be trotted out.

It seems that 'up to 10 people' will address the meeting in support of the application and '10 against'. I'm not quite sure why it's 'up to 10' (supporting) and a specific '10' (against). It might just be loose wording on the council website.

That will be followed by a presentation from council planning officers outlining the detail of the application. The next stage of the meeting will see councillors given the opportunity to ask questions and debate the issue before a vote is taken (although the vote could be deferred to a later planning committee meeting if councillors require further information).

Whatever happens this evening won't be the final step.

If the planning committee approves the application it would have to be referred to the secretary of state because of the Green Belt issue. If they reject it council procedure dictates that the decision would have to be ratified at a later planning committee meeting because rejection would be contrary to the recommendations of the council's own officers. Furthermore, the airport could appeal to the national Planning Inspectorate in the event of a rejection. There is also the possibility of a postponement as I outlined above.

I wonder which outcome the airport management is anticipating.

 

[superking]

Take yr pick which way it goes. At least there is a bit of movement on the planning now. The planning has been with the council now nearly 2 years.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

If anyone wants to watch the planning committee deliberations this evening this is the link to the live stream

 

[BRSregular]

Overwhelming rejected.

 

[superking]

I did see bits of the debate. It the rejection of the planning went as expected. Rejected by a big margin. The side for rejection I must say were very good at putting their side to the council.I must say the group for expansion put a very good case,what I seen of it was a lot better than the group seeking expansion.as a lot of seeking expansion had holes picked in it on many points.The planning application will now gonthe minister as some of the planning is on green belt land.1 point I picked up on was more coach routes to the airport and get more on public transport that is running now. The next sentence was car parking extended on green belt land and another multi story car park. The airport shot their self in the foot by saying they going to get more public transport operating with routes planned,but could not say when. The airport said we going to do this that and another but could no time scale. With the plans going to the minister it wonders how all this will end up.

 

[Jono577]

Oh well we could see that one coming! Just think that during that 5 hour meeting China, India etc managed to pump out more co2 than they are going to save by not allowing the airport to have an extra 2 million passengers over the next 5 years. Let's hope the airport appeals and wins.

 

[Marko1]

I’m not at all surprised. Shows failings in the planning system where experts approve it but elected officials say no. However we are still a million off the max of 10 million and with the loss of tcx and bmi last year plenty of room for growth still. With neither Ryanair or easyJet significantly expanding there’s still room for a few new airlines yet.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

This went more or less according to how I've been predicting since last May's local elections brought in a 'Rainbow' council to North Somerset full of Lib-Dems, Independents and Greens. If I'm honest I was expecting 9 or 10 to support the application instead of 7 and one abstention. In itself the majority will have little to zero effect if (I will be amazed if it's not when) the airport launches its appeal to the Planning Inspectorate.

Dave Lees quite properly said this morning that they would await the council's formal reasons for rejection before considering an appeal. The airport must have been aware of the likely outcome of the planning committee's deliberations since the council's political make-up changed last year and I'm sure have been making plans to take the matter further.

It is a peculiarity of our planning system that one (and this case small) council has the say over the future of a major regional facility such as an airport. More so in that neighbourong councils in Bristol, South Gloucestershire and the West of England Combined Authority all support the expansion.

Another point is that many of these councillors who ousted much of the previous Conservative majority on NSC campaigned against airport expansion on the 'hustings' prior to last May's local elections. So it can hardly be said that some of last night's planning committee approached the subject with an unbiased mind.

A Planning Inspectorate enquiry which will almost certainly involve a public enquiry is in many ways a better pathway and I'm not just saying this following last night - I said so many months ago on F4A. The matter will be fully investigated by dispassionate, independent and professional planning inspectors who will apply the law and government/local policy unimpeded by local pressure and a non-professional approach that is the lot of a local councillor. The downside is that it will add probably at least another 18 months to a final decision.

Planning Inspectors can decide a planning appeal issue themselves but in some cases, usually large scale, the secretary of state will decide the outcome with the relevant planning inspector making recommendations following an enquiry. In this case there has to be secretary of state involvement anyway because of the Green Belt issue.

BRS still has just over a million passengers a year 'breathing space' so it might be assumed that existng airlines could continue to grow relatively unimpeded over the next couple of years. There might be space too for a few new routes with new airlines.

BRS has seen its annual passenger throughput increase by over 2.6 million passengers in the past four years based almost entirely on the growth of existing airlines so, unless a new airline was looking to set up in a big way, nothing might have changed in the foreseeabe future (say the next 2-3 years) whatever the outcome of last night's council deliberations.

The downside is that there will be uncertainty until the result of a planning appeal (assuming there is one) is determined. That might have an effect over the next couple of years on any airline or airlines that might have been planning to look seriously at BRS in a substantial way, such as a 4-aircraft Jet2 base that was strongly rumoured a couple of years ago - I give this solely as an example.

They (not necessarily Jet2) would either have to postpone any plans or look elsewhere, assuming they judged that 'elsewhere' (wherever it might be) would bring in the same sort of return.

If, and I think it highly unlikely, BRS was stuck on 10 mppa after all appeal channels had been exhausted then clearly that would be an entirely new scenario and all manner of outcomes might be speculated, but that time has not yet arrived, although at some point in the future the airport will find itself unable to expand any more unless future technology has altered everyday life to a remarkable degree.

 

[Marko1]

Bristol has had a rotten year hasn’t it - bmi and Thomas cook disappearing and now this hump in the road. We could do with some positive news - plenty of opportunities still

 

[Sherburnflyer92]

I just don't get the arguments for not expanding. Especially economic arguments. The direct and indirect economic impact such expansion would have is failed on climate change brigade and the NIMBYS.

I especially don't get the climate change and extension rebellion way of doing things and arguments i get even more frustrated. They should be, at this moment in time, directing all frustrations to the governments, local and national, to try and get more and more people off the road and onto surface transport. Build transit systems around the country in major cities without it - invest in buses and trains. That is a MAJOR achilles heel in the green argument is the fact we've got towns, major cities, that are grid lock with cars that are idling emissions into environment. London is at bursting point. And emissions are high. We've got people making unnecessary (including myself) journeys. There needs to be a clear vision and strategy on infrastructure now around the entire UK. It's as simple as that. The government also need to educate the British public on other issues which affect climate change.

Instead it seems like the easy target, aviation, is once again the first to experience this. Rather then looking at the bigger picture on what can be changed then go towards aviation.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Bristol has had a rotten year hasn’t it - bmi and Thomas cook disappearing and now this hump in the road. We could do with some positive news - plenty of opportunities still

I suppose it can be assumed that the new draft master plan - over a year overdue already - will be mothballed until the airport's future is decided one way or the other.

I note one of the councillors at the meeting came up with the nonsensical claim that the proposed two million passengers per annum expansion would lead to an extra 11,000 car journeys a day. At 12 mppa there would be fewer than 5,500 extra passengers a day so if everyone, including children, drove alone to and from the airport there would be only behalf the councillor's total. In fact, with probably most people arriving in at least twos or on buses, coaches or minicoaches the extra number of journeys would be no more than a third of the councillor's figure at the very most, even including the extra staff members who might drive to and from work.

A NSC planning officer derided the claim and came up with a much lower and far more accurate figure but the councillor would not accept it, therefore those looking for every reason to reject the application took on board this misinformation eagerly. This was typical of the bits of the 'debate' I witnessed - high on rhetoric, low on facts.

As far as I can tell, most of the Conservatives voted against the motion to reject the application (the sound on the recording is indistinct in one or two places during the vote), and perhaps a bit surprisingly all the Labour councillors voted to support the rejection which was particularly interesting given that one of those witnesses who spoke in favour of the expansion at the beginning of the meeting was a Unite Union representative who was concerned about jobs.

Based on the voting last night it seems pretty certain that the previous Conservative-dominated council would have approved the application. They fell foul last May to the public's frustration with the May government's futile attempts at finding a Brexit solution, so perhaps for once Brexit really can be blamed or, in some people's eyes, praised for the planning committee's decision last night.

I wonder if the airport could have found a more varied selection of speaking supporters without BRS connections - not that I think it would have made one iota of difference to the outcome as I'm convinced that most of the councillors knew what they were going to vote even before the meeting commenced.

The airport's supporters list did begin with the principal of Weston College who told how vital to his institution the airport is. Beyond that they included the MD of First West of England whose company does a lot of business with and at BRS, three aviation consultants with past links to the airport, a restaurant owner who had once worked at BRS and the current airport customer experience department trainer.

If the airport does appeal and is successful NSC might find themselves with rather large legal bills. They were warned clearly about that last night.

A slightly amusing postscript: I was listening to the BBC Radio Bristol morning programme today when a listener contacted the BBC to ask if last night's council decision meant that Bristol Airport would have to close down. It does show that some people can get hold of all parts of a stick.

 

[Jerry]

Bristol has had a rotten year hasn’t it - bmi and Thomas cook disappearing and now this hump in the road. We could do with some positive news - plenty of opportunities still

It could be worse, your main scheduled airline could've pulled it's base with the loss of quite a few european routes and roughly over 15% to 20% of the airports capacity could've been lost without any of it being replaced and other airlines at the airport could've cut flights as well turning what should've been the best year in over a decade into one long streak of negativity while nearly every airport in the country has for the most part it's lost Thomas Cook capacity replaced and many continue to attract new airlines like it's going out of fashion! And still you see people online moaning about no flights to Orlando!!!
Bristol has had a bump in the road but Easyjet and other airlines have for the most part smoothed that bump out.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

It could be worse, your main scheduled airline could've pulled it's base with the loss of quite a few european routes and roughly over 15% to 20% of the airports capacity could've been lost without any of it being replaced and other airlines at the airport could've cut flights as well turning what should've been the best year in over a decade into one long streak of negativity while nearly every airport in the country has for the most part it's lost Thomas Cook capacity replaced and many continue to attract new airlines like it's going out of fashion! And still you see people online moaning about no flights to Orlando!!!
Bristol has had a bump in the road but Easyjet and other airlines have for the most part smoothed that bump out.

Those are fair points, Jerry.

I suppose it's easy (no pun intended, well perhaps a bit) to assume that BRS will just grow and grow as it's done for most of the past half-century: only five years in the past 50 when there has been a drop in passenger numbers compared with the previous year: 1974, 1985, 1990, 1996 and 2009. It probably will grow its passenger numbers again in 2020 but, with so many national and international imponderables not just on the horizon but a bit closer than that with some, there is no certainty.

You are obviously alluding to CWL. Perhaps that much-needed news might not be too far away from reading one or two accounts elsewhere.

 

[Jerry]

You are obviously alluding to CWL. Perhaps that much-needed news might not be too far away from reading one or two accounts elsewhere.

Yes. Sorry if the post comes over a bit arsey, I just don't generally believe when it comes to Bristol people need to be despondent. The airport is in excellent shape and yes lost 2 airlines but the capacity for one has mostly been replaced and the airport has replaced 2 of the 2nd former airline's routes and in the long term may end up attracting more Star Alliance carriers.
Despite the setback of the planning application which I expect the airport expected Bristol airport's should still do well as an airport in the future.

 

[Marko1]

My point was that the airport has had some setbacks over the last year but opportunities still exist. There was never intent to compare against other airports. The point I’m making is that Bristol could do with a little pick me up - where’s easyJet when we need them ? As for cardiff I’m sure there’s plenty of buns in the oven just waiting to be ready - after all who predicted Qatar ?

 

[superking]

The leader of NSC was interviewed next morning on the tv.The 1 point put to the leader was if the plan went to the minister to sort the problem out,the interviewer said this will cost NSC a lot of money if the plan was passed.The NSC leader said that's a chance we will take and the money for that will come back to the people who live in North Somerset to foot the expenses.The people of North Somerset did not vote to see the council do what they like with all the expense back to the people who live in North Somerset.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

The leader of NSC was interviewed next morning on the tv.The 1 point put to the leader was if the plan went to the minister to sort the problem out,the interviewer said this will cost NSC a lot of money if the plan was passed.The NSC leader said that's a chance we will take and the money for that will come back to the people who live in North Somerset to foot the expenses.The people of North Somerset did not vote to see the council do what they like with all the expense back to the people who live in North Somerset.

Council says it will defend any Bristol Airport appeal for its expansion

It could cost North Somerset Council tens of thousands of pounds

www.bristolpost.co.uk

A report in the local rag makes the same point. Last Monday's rejection decision is yet to be ratified by the NSC planning committee. That will happen at a future committee meeting - date to be notified. The committee could overturn their own original rejection decision at the ratification meeting but this seems unlikely in the extreme.

If the airport does appeal - the CEO says they have not ruled it out which I take to mean they will - both sides are usually responsible for their own costs at the appeal which with a planning issue of this size would lead to a public enqury. If the planning inspector decided that either side acted unreasonaby in the appeal he/she can order the 'offending' side to pay the other side's costs as well as their own.

Bristol Airport's reaction to North Somerset Council's Planning & Regulatory Committee decision

We are disappointed by the decision of North Somerset Council’s Planning & Regulatory Committee to recommend refusal of our planning application to increase Bristol Airport’s capacity from 10 to 12 million passengers a year, contrary to the recommendation of the Council’s own planning officers.

www.bristolairport.co.uk

The airport issued a short press release giving its response to the council's rejection decision. As might be expected it gives little away other than to express disappointment, together with a restatement of the belief that the region's economy will suffer and yet more people will drive to London airports from the region.

Opinion: Refusing to let Bristol Airport expand is the wrong decision

"The council has slammed the door shut on its progress and put the onus on the public not to fly"

www.bristolpost.co.uk

I commented the other day that the Bristol Post has been constantly highlighting opponents' activities re the BRS expansion plans with little balanced coverage re supporters. After Monday's decision the editor has allowed one of his reporters to make the case for expansion.

 

[superking]

On the subject of night flights in the summer seasons.All the flights over head the airport are not BRS flights.It can put most down to BRS,but I bet the objectors of night flights has done any home work on the subject. Some flights each night are CWL bound,and they are at a level similar to the BRS flights,so are counted in BRS figures.I don't know how routings for CWL work over BRS I wonder if the flight path for CWL has been looked into. It does wonder also is there any reason why CWL bound aircraft can not be routed away from BRS air space.
I get the feeling CWL bound aircraft are being counted into the BRS figure of night flights.Perhaps some one in the know of routings can tell us how flight paths are worked out.

 

[Jerry]

I get the feeling CWL bound aircraft are being counted into the BRS figure of night flights.Perhaps some one in the know of routings can tell us how flight paths are worked

I can't see how they would be as I'd have thought it would be down to movements at Bristol. Most of the traffic for CWL passes by at 8 to 10000 feet above. Another factor is that the flightpaths for CWL will also be influenced by BRS flightpaths.

 

[NOSIGWX]

I can't see how they would be as I'd have thought it would be down to movements at Bristol. Most of the traffic for CWL passes by at 8 to 10000 feet above. Another factor is that the flightpaths for CWL will also be influenced by BRS flightpaths.

I'm not sure if flights inbound to Cardiff would count towards the BRS night quota, but Superking is correct in that when runway 30 is in use at CWL aircraft are decended to 3500 feet through the Bristol airspace as a more direct route towards final approach at Cardiff.