​​

 

• The initial statement that this is a temporary application rings untrue. The breach has been going since at least 2016, a considerable length of time, and by continuing until 2024, this is a period of well over 5 years, a government’s term in office, which is not temporary'. The airport should be held to account for this.

 

• There is no indication that the airport will ease this breach of condition, it seems that they want to continue, if not expand, and seem to be riding roughshod over the planning regulations and controls that all are supposed to follow. The negative impact on all the surrounding local communities was and is known by the airport, but they have carried on regardless.  This seems more bullying than working co-operatively with all who live in the surrounding areas.

​

• The condition was originally put in place to control aircraft noise in return for the granting of planning permission for passenger growth and the major new infrastructure works. The Airport was fully aware of this condition, and has always been able to fully control this, but seemingly did nothing to ensure that growth stayed within the noise contour condition, which seems wholly negligent on the Airport's behalf. 

 

• LLA has always been able to control the noise by controlling the number of aircraft booked, thus this breach must have been knowingly performed. The Airport would have known about the problem at the time of booking airline slots and has just expanded regardless. Surely this is a dangerous precedent, as approval will give the green light to them breaking any future planning controls with impunity.

 

• There is no reason why the Airport should not comply with the conditions and pay fines as a result. They have broken this order purely in the pursuit of profit, making a mockery of development control and plan-led development policy.

 

• The Government announced its overall policy is to reduce aircraft noise, whereas LLA have done its best to increase noise and pollution regardless of policy, law or the impact on the local communities.

 

• The increase in noise contour is not just related to day flights, but night flights, where the increase is having an even greater detrimental effect on life. We are regularly woken up by night/early morning flights, an uninterrupted night’s sleep is a human right. LLA has blamed the breaking of night contour regulations on late flights; however, Bickerdike Allen, the airport’s noise consultants, have indicated that this is not an accurate description, and that late-arriving aircraft were not the main cause for breach. As is stated in the Annual Monitoring Reports, the breach was due to the rapid growth in aircraft numbers. And since the revised application states the day and night contours are both likely to be breached, it can hardly be a problem of day noise shifting into night, otherwise the day noise contour would not also be threatened. 

 

• The breach is due to noncompliance of expansion parameters not due to aircraft changes, and by trying to blame it on this, LLA is not being truthful. If they cannot manage aircraft numbers and noise levels within the agreed parameters, perhaps they are not fit for purpose. 

 

• The noise increases also have a negative impact on the wildlife and peace of the area of outstanding natural beauty in Kensworth, Studham and Whipsnade. In addition to the potential negative impact on animals at Whipsnade Zoo, which have higher sensory perception levels than humans.

 

We fully object to this application because of the continued negative impact this has on the environment in which we live. London Luton Airport seemingly have little desire to comply with planning regulations or listen to the plight of the surrounding communities, and this goes against the basis of the democratic society in which we live. 

 

Should LLA get away with this breach, it is setting a dangerous precedent for their compliance to future planning regulations, and thus further significant negative environmental and social impacts on local communities are a real risk.