Gloom at Luton
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: London Whipsnade Wildlife Park
Posts: 5,040
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gloom at Luton
I understand from a reliable source that the neanderthals at Luton Borough Council have finally won the day: with Vauxhall Motors (once an employer of some 25,000 staff) due to close next month, the local council has refused planning permission for TBI’s proposed new Cargo Apron. This in turn throws into question Metro’s development at Luton.
Clearly, the council wishes to exacerbate the unemployment situation in the locale?
Clearly, the council wishes to exacerbate the unemployment situation in the locale?
niknak
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Astonishing isn't it?. .I'm not a regular user of Luton, (4 - 5 times a year), but it never ceases to amaze me to what lengths the local authority will go to to make it less accessible for the punters or to discourage its development.. .Perhaps they'd be happier if the whole place closed and everything went to Stansted or Cambridge, which is not entirely unrealistic. <img src="rolleyes.gif" border="0">
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: A Virtual World!
Posts: 451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What a surprise (not). The politicians strike again - it is mostly down to them (and some inept management) that Luton is in the state it is now.
The council is happy to take the extortinate "per passenger fee" from TBI with one hand, yet seek to condemn the place with the other.
It would be very interesting to know on what grounds the Planning Application has been rejected. If it is on noise grounds, then that is crazy. The proposed site of the new cargo apron is much further away from the houses on the airport's eastern boundary than the current facility, and with the increased apron space, it might even attract some quiter aircraft. Furthermore, as I understand it, the DHL 727's who are the main noise offenders will be history soon as 757's are slowly introduced.
The council is happy to take the extortinate "per passenger fee" from TBI with one hand, yet seek to condemn the place with the other.
It would be very interesting to know on what grounds the Planning Application has been rejected. If it is on noise grounds, then that is crazy. The proposed site of the new cargo apron is much further away from the houses on the airport's eastern boundary than the current facility, and with the increased apron space, it might even attract some quiter aircraft. Furthermore, as I understand it, the DHL 727's who are the main noise offenders will be history soon as 757's are slowly introduced.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: London Whipsnade Wildlife Park
Posts: 5,040
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It would appear that the permission was rejected on a technicality, if remedied work could start after easter, no actual idea as to cause of the rebuff though.
Both Metro and Signature sure have some grand plans for the place! The cargo apron would become packed with biz jets.
Both Metro and Signature sure have some grand plans for the place! The cargo apron would become packed with biz jets.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: London Whipsnade Wildlife Park
Posts: 5,040
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The technicality could well be the folk who live across the county boundary. Word has it, that a neighbouring council objected on the grounds of increased noise from a new engine run up/test facilty. I am told that the new purpose built area will actually be quieter.
Rumours still exist about Ryanair increasing their base size at Luton.
Rumours still exist about Ryanair increasing their base size at Luton.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: London
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When are we going to see some of those improvements that were promised when easyJet signed their 20 year deal? I am tired of getting soaked everytime it rains at LTN as I make my way to an aircraft.
