Councillors in Herts told to expect decision on Luton Airport expansion plans 'within weeks'

County councillors have received an update on Luton Airport plans
Watch more of our videos on Shots! 
and live on Freeview channel 276
Visit Shots! now

Herts councillors have been told to expect a decision on London Luton Airport’s proposals to increase passenger numbers within weeks.

The airport’s plans to increase passenger numbers from 18m a year to 19m a year were scrutinised by a public inquiry back in 2022.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

And at a meeting of the council’s sustainable economic growth cabinet panel on Monday (September 11), councillors were told to expect a decision from the Secretary of State by October 13.

Outside of the airport.Outside of the airport.
Outside of the airport.

Meanwhile airport chiefs have already submitted a further application, that they hope could increase passenger numbers at the airport to 32m a year.

And at the meeting of the cabinet panel, the council’s team leader for strategic land use Paul Donovan reported that the council was already engaged in this consultation on these further plans.

The council’s stated position is to object to the growth of the airport, ‘unless and until there is evidence to demonstrate, and mechanisms to ensure, that the airport can grow and be operated in a responsible manner’.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

And the position statement points to factors that include environmental impacts, amenity and heath of impacted communities, as well as the provision of ‘surface access needs’.

Mr Donovan told the panel, the council would be submitting evidence to hearings, scheduled to start towards the end of September and run through until February.

But he said the upcoming decision on whether – or not – passenger numbers could be increased to 19m was important, because it would change the ‘baseline’ data used in the later application.

At the meeting Conservative Cllr Annie Brewster agreed that the 19m decision was ‘key’.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

She pointed to the ‘surface access’ issues additional passengers would have in villages, should passenger numbers be increased.

And she urged the council to strengthen its position against the bid to expand annual passenger numbers to 32m.

“We are being told that the traffic are dropping on the M25 and up the M1,” she said.

“We all know that they’re rat-running through our villages.

“So I know these are early days, but my concern is that this is beefed up enough, at this point, to be very clear about how irate we are.”

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Cllr Brewster suggested the council’s position statement should make it clear there should be no expansion until the airport had delivered previous mitigations.

And she pointed to the need to reduce noise and noise contours, to avoid aircraft being held at 5000 ft or lower and for a modern fleet that was less noisy and more fuel efficient.

However director of growth and place Colin Haigh said the council’s existing position was already a ‘catch all’ with lots of different elements.

And executive member for sustainable economic growth Cllr Stephen Boulton said that although he would think about it, he did not want to change wording ‘on the hoof’.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Also raising concerns at the meeting was Conservative Cllr Michael Muir, who said an increase to 19m passengers a year would increase noise and disturbance in north Herts.

However he suggested this could be improved, if a review by the government and NATS meant that aircraft could climb to 8000ft more quickly.

And he said: “We need to get the government and NATS to proceed on their review of airways.”

Cllr Muir said he was also concerned that if passenger numbers were ultimately allowed to increase to 32m a year, traffic could ‘totally’ clog-up north Hertfordshire roads.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

And he suggested the impact would be so great around Hitchin that a by-pass would be required.

Closing the discussion on the airport’s plans, Cllr Boulton highlighted climate change.

He said: “The increase to 32m is really significant – it’s not like the increase of the extra 1m. To go to 32m is really significant.

“And in times of climate change and so on , its just slightly odd, I would say. But still. . . “