Stansted Development - A step nearer?

Admiral Huddy · 31-01-2007, 10:37

I can’t hide my sadness of this news. If anyone knows the Uttlesford area, they’ll know that this is one of the most beautiful parts of Essex if not the Southeast. The surrounding areas such as Thaxted, Great Dunmow, the Easters, Saffron Waldon etc are like time warp villages.

I fail to understand why the government would even consider this proposal in an age where we need to combat Global Warming. Surely we need to discourage the use of air travel not encourage it. This completely contradicts everything the government have said about the reduction of air pollution in the UK. Makes a hole a mockery of the whole damn thing.. Hey, you switch of your lights and turn your washing machine to 30oc, and we’ll fly more planes!!

Ten million extra passengers a year would put a massive strain on local infrastructure, which has only just been changed to accommodate the one runway it has already.

That 2.2bn would certainly buy a few more wind farms, which would be far more welcome.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/essex/6312321.stm

http://www.stopstanstedexpansion.com/

What do you think?

Mark · 31-01-2007, 11:14

The problem with Thaxted, and to some extent Dunmow (though not as much), is that they'll be closer to the flight path for the new runway. Dunmow is far enough away that it'll probably escape the worst (at least I hope so - although we've just gained a new Travelodge), but I'm not sure about Thaxsted.

Yes, there is some beautiful scenery around there, and some little hamlets that'll get wiped off the map, which is a great shame.

Believe it or not, I was around that area (including several places that would be airfield under the proposed scheme) for the first time over Christmas, so I now know what you mean where I wouldn't have before.

Desmo · 31-01-2007, 11:38

Agree with you Huddy. Let's knock up flight taxes to cut back on air travel whilst building more runways. What a joke.

Admiral Huddy · 31-01-2007, 11:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Desmo

Agree with you Huddy. Let's knock up flight taxes to cut back on air travel whilst building more runways. What a joke.

Surrounding towns like Bishops's Stortford, Chelmsford and Braintree would be crippled further as development and growth go beyond acceptable limits.

Pebs · 31-01-2007, 11:45

Did you get the stuff throught the mail too Huddy? I've not had chance to read it yet but am I right in thinking its a done deal already?

Admiral Huddy · 31-01-2007, 11:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pebbles

Did you get the stuff throught the mail too Huddy? I've not had chance to read it yet but am I right in thinking its a done deal already?

No I haven't, I guess it will be coming.

I'm not really sure. As far as I'm aware local council have rejected the request but like most thing in this un-democratic society we live in, it can be overturned by central government and this is BAAs plan.

Mark · 31-01-2007, 11:54

Disagree with that. Unlike the other public transport, there's still big money in air transportation, otherwise we wouldn't have had the recent multi-billion bidding war for BAA. Given that money isn't the biggest issue, while there's demand they're going to get built.

Thing is, we still need business transport, but with all these low fare airlines popping up, we're getting the droves of holidaymakers as well. It's the latter that is the biggest environmental problem right now (that's not to say that the former isn't an environmental problem). The Government clearly isn't going to say no like that to big business - we're having enough trouble keeping some big firms in this country when it's cheaper abroad, so if we start screwing up transport links (as if they weren't bad enough already) the consequences probably wouldn't be nice.

We can all go around saying 'no, never, not in my back yard', but if we want big business, then we'd better have the infrastructure for it. I'm absolutely fine with discouraging holidaymakers, and at some point in the future demand may well reduce, but I doubt that's any time soon, so digging in with the 'no, never' attitude isn't going to be very helpful.

I'm on the fence on this one - I don't like the environmental impact, but I recognise that there's still a need for transport links. Not being in the area all the time probably counts for quite a lot with this attitude - though most of my family is still in the area and my parents will be affected (and if they get a place on the new estate up by Tescos in Dunmow, they'll be nearer, not further away).

Admiral Huddy · 31-01-2007, 12:04

I hear what you are saying Mark. There is a need for better transport links but it should be concentrated on the British transport system not the airports. Better cheaper public transport for example.

It's no good having having more runways, airports and flights only for trade and passengers to be bottle-necked on the roads and trains. There has to be a ceiling and cutoff. You can't keep on expanding each time the economy shows growth or demand says so.

Zirax · 31-01-2007, 12:20

The surrounding area of Dunmow is exceptional. I really enjoy both going for a drive and a good cycle around there. In terms of housing, its going to knock thousands off the value of houses in the flight path.

As has been said the villages are almost a time warp and the countryside is excellent. It will make housing prices in Chelmsford go through the roof.

The existing chelmsford platform can't cope and it will only get worse. Sure there is the stansted express, but still the numbers at chelmsford will increase.

For everything that is against this I can see this going ahead. Each few years they try to put it through, wrecking the area.... luckily we have managed to rebuff them so far. It looks like a matter of time until they win.

Desmo · 31-01-2007, 12:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pebbles

I've not had chance to read it yet but am I right in thinking its a done deal already?

Of course it is. There's big money for all parties involved, sod the public

Me cynical? Never

31-01-2007, 10:37	#1
Admiral Huddy HOMO-Sapien Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Chelmsford Posts: 6,692	Stansted Development - A step nearer? I can’t hide my sadness of this news. If anyone knows the Uttlesford area, they’ll know that this is one of the most beautiful parts of Essex if not the Southeast. The surrounding areas such as Thaxted, Great Dunmow, the Easters, Saffron Waldon etc are like time warp villages. I fail to understand why the government would even consider this proposal in an age where we need to combat Global Warming. Surely we need to discourage the use of air travel not encourage it. This completely contradicts everything the government have said about the reduction of air pollution in the UK. Makes a hole a mockery of the whole damn thing.. Hey, you switch of your lights and turn your washing machine to 30oc, and we’ll fly more planes!! Ten million extra passengers a year would put a massive strain on local infrastructure, which has only just been changed to accommodate the one runway it has already. That 2.2bn would certainly buy a few more wind farms, which would be far more welcome. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/essex/6312321.stm http://www.stopstanstedexpansion.com/ What do you think? __________________ I just got lost in thought.. It was very unfamiliar territory. Techie Talk \| My gaming Blog \| PC spec \| The Admirals log Last edited by Admiral Huddy; 31-01-2007 at 10:52.

31-01-2007, 11:38	#3
Desmo The Last Airbender Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Pigmopad Posts: 11,915	Agree with you Huddy. Let's knock up flight taxes to cut back on air travel whilst building more runways. What a joke. __________________

31-01-2007, 11:45	#5
Pebs Easymouth Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 6,716	Did you get the stuff throught the mail too Huddy? I've not had chance to read it yet but am I right in thinking its a done deal already? __________________ ...faster you naughty little monkey! Running through hell, heaven can wait!

31-01-2007, 11:54	#7
Mark Screaming Orgasm Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Newbury Posts: 15,194	Disagree with that. Unlike the other public transport, there's still big money in air transportation, otherwise we wouldn't have had the recent multi-billion bidding war for BAA. Given that money isn't the biggest issue, while there's demand they're going to get built. Thing is, we still need business transport, but with all these low fare airlines popping up, we're getting the droves of holidaymakers as well. It's the latter that is the biggest environmental problem right now (that's not to say that the former isn't an environmental problem). The Government clearly isn't going to say no like that to big business - we're having enough trouble keeping some big firms in this country when it's cheaper abroad, so if we start screwing up transport links (as if they weren't bad enough already) the consequences probably wouldn't be nice. We can all go around saying 'no, never, not in my back yard', but if we want big business, then we'd better have the infrastructure for it. I'm absolutely fine with discouraging holidaymakers, and at some point in the future demand may well reduce, but I doubt that's any time soon, so digging in with the 'no, never' attitude isn't going to be very helpful. I'm on the fence on this one - I don't like the environmental impact, but I recognise that there's still a need for transport links. Not being in the area all the time probably counts for quite a lot with this attitude - though most of my family is still in the area and my parents will be affected (and if they get a place on the new estate up by Tescos in Dunmow, they'll be nearer, not further away). Last edited by Mark; 31-01-2007 at 11:57.

31-01-2007, 12:04	#8
Admiral Huddy HOMO-Sapien Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Chelmsford Posts: 6,692	I hear what you are saying Mark. There is a need for better transport links but it should be concentrated on the British transport system not the airports. Better cheaper public transport for example. It's no good having having more runways, airports and flights only for trade and passengers to be bottle-necked on the roads and trains. There has to be a ceiling and cutoff. You can't keep on expanding each time the economy shows growth or demand says so. __________________ I just got lost in thought.. It was very unfamiliar territory. Techie Talk \| My gaming Blog \| PC spec \| The Admirals log

31-01-2007, 11:14	#2
Mark Screaming Orgasm Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Newbury Posts: 15,194	The problem with Thaxted, and to some extent Dunmow (though not as much), is that they'll be closer to the flight path for the new runway. Dunmow is far enough away that it'll probably escape the worst (at least I hope so - although we've just gained a new Travelodge), but I'm not sure about Thaxsted. Yes, there is some beautiful scenery around there, and some little hamlets that'll get wiped off the map, which is a great shame. Believe it or not, I was around that area (including several places that would be airfield under the proposed scheme) for the first time over Christmas, so I now know what you mean where I wouldn't have before.

31-01-2007, 12:20	#9
Zirax Goes up to 11! Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 4,577	The surrounding area of Dunmow is exceptional. I really enjoy both going for a drive and a good cycle around there. In terms of housing, its going to knock thousands off the value of houses in the flight path. As has been said the villages are almost a time warp and the countryside is excellent. It will make housing prices in Chelmsford go through the roof. The existing chelmsford platform can't cope and it will only get worse. Sure there is the stansted express, but still the numbers at chelmsford will increase. For everything that is against this I can see this going ahead. Each few years they try to put it through, wrecking the area.... luckily we have managed to rebuff them so far. It looks like a matter of time until they win.