Quote:
|
Originally Posted by crumbs chief
How about the following scenario: apply for planning permission for a bigger, noisier and more instrusive airport; sell the airport to a property development company; redo the planning permission for a large number of people-friendly houses; appease the original anti-airport objectors by providing much needed additional housing, including affordable housing; close airport and make profit. Will Thomsonfly ever make any money out of flying scruffy,half empty 737s out of Coventry anyway?
|
Coventry City Council own the freehold and they support and require passenger services within the lease.
Airport shifted nearly 800K pax last year through temporary terminal, the market is there.
Most pax would stand for 2 hours of they got the flight cheaper so no problem with the 735's.
With Birmingham's proposed second runway causing all sorts of environmental concerns, why not just develop Coventry (or as RYR would probably call it "Birmingham South") for some of the proposed pax flight increases - a ready made runway and infrastructure just 12 miles down the road.
Luton's masterplan states no Exec by 2030, there's another possible avenue as CVT is just 45 minutes up the M1 (and just 30 minutes by heli to centre of London).
Great road connections = more freight services.
The future is bright at CVT
