This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/jul/17/heathrow-airport-third-runway

The article has changed 4 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Heathrow third runway could head south-west, north-west or north Heathrow third runway could head south-west, north-west or north
(about 4 hours later)
Heathrow airport has unveiled three different proposals for a third runway, putting tens of thousands of homes either under new flight paths or at risk of demolition. Heathrow airport has revealed three different proposals for a third runway, putting tens of thousands of homes either under new flight paths or at risk of demolition.
Europe's largest airport revealed possible expansion plans for a new runway that would either lie to the south-west, the north-west or the north of the two current runways, at a cost of £14-18bn, increasing flights to 740,000 a year. Europe's largest airport unveiled possible expansion plans for a new runway that would lie either to the south-west, the north-west or the north of the two current runways, at a cost of £14-18bn, increasing flights to 740,000 a year. All options would require the construction of a major new airport terminal.
The southern plan would see 850 homes in the neighbouring village of Stanwell Moor demolished, cross an existing reservoir and would likely see some of the most affluent parts of west London subject to massive increases in aircraft noise. The plans could be combined to create a four-runway hub, though Heathrow said a third runway would be sufficient until 2040.
While parts of Feltham in Hounslow would be most affected by a new southern runway, the major opposition is likely to be sparked in parts of Twickenham and Richmond, where wealthy homeowners would find themselves under the flight path. The southern plan would see the entire neighbouring village of Stanwell Moor demolished. The runway would cross an existing reservoir and the M25, and subject some of the most affluent parts of west London to significant increases in aircraft noise.
Heathrow has not revived the same plan for a third runway that was approved by the Labour government but overturned by the coalition when it came to power in 2010. While parts of Feltham, in Hounslow, would be most affected by a new southern runway, the major opposition is likely to come from parts of Twickenham and Richmond, where wealthy homeowners would find themselves under the flight path.
No homes in the village of Sipson – the focus last time, now largely owned by Heathrow – would be destroyed under two of the new proposals but it would still be flattened for the northern option. Heathrow has submitted two new proposals to the north, one of which would entail the demolition of 950 properties, including the whole village of Harmondsworth and two heritage buildings; a shorter alternative would be built over Harlington, Cranford Cross and Sipson, and would mean 2,700 homes being bulldozed. The latter is the most similar to the third runway approved by the Labour government, the plan for which the coalition overturned when it came to power, in 2010.
Colin Matthews, Heathrow's chief executive, said: "After half a century of vigorous debate but little action, it is clear the UK desperately needs a single hub airport with the capacity to provide the links to emerging economies which can boost UK jobs, GDP and trade. Colin Matthews, Heathrow's chief executive, said: "After half a century of vigorous debate but little action, it is clear the UK desperately needs a single hub airport with the capacity to provide the links to emerging economies, which can boost UK jobs, GDP and trade.
"It is clear that the best solution for taxpayers, passengers and business is to build on the strength we already have at Heathrow. Today we are showing how that vision can be achieved whilst keeping the impact on local residents to an absolute minimum." "It is clear that the best solution for taxpayers, passengers and business is to build on the strength we already have at Heathrow. Today, we are showing how that vision can be achieved whilst keeping the impact on local residents to an absolute minimum."
Heathrow said all three options offered the chance of adding a fourth runway in the future, if needed, and said it would fund the runways itself rather than asking for taxpayers to pay. Heathrow said all three options offered the chance of adding a fourth runway in the future, if needed. It said it would fund the runways itself rather than ask taxpayers to pay.
The airport, along with many business groups and much of the aviation industry, argues that its expansion is crucial to preserve Britain's position as a leading player in air transport. The airport currently operates to capacity, making it vulnerable to huge disruption and limiting the number of flights that can be offered around the world.The airport, along with many business groups and much of the aviation industry, argues that its expansion is crucial to preserve Britain's position as a leading player in air transport. The airport currently operates to capacity, making it vulnerable to huge disruption and limiting the number of flights that can be offered around the world.
The airport has identified noise as the main political barrier to its expansion plans and hopes quieter planes, steeper flight paths and other mitigation measures can help dampen opposition. However, John Stewart of the local campaign group HACAN said: "They can't get round the fact that a third runway would bring 250,000 extra planes a year to Heathrow. With that sort of increase it's going to be pretty hard to argue that overall noise levels won't increase. We're going to see London and the south-east under an even louder sky of sound." The airport has identified noise as the main political barrier to its expansion plans and hopes quieter planes, steeper flight paths and other mitigation measures can help dampen opposition.
Heathrow's proposals mark a new juncture in its ongoing expansion campaign, as it has previously not been drawn on specific plans for new runways. The airport insisted that the choice of one of its options would be a "political decision" to be taken by the government rather than made by the airport operator, with different costs and benefits to each. It claims that by 2030, even with an extra runway, improvements in technology would reduce the number of people badly affected by noise by 10-20%. The airport said an extra runway could provide more periods of respite for some people currently affected by early-morning flights.
Its plans come two days after Boris Johnson, the mayor of London, proposed closing Heathrow and converting it into a garden city, claiming it could house 250,000 people. However, John Stewart of the local campaign group Hacan said: "They can't get round the fact that a third runway would bring 250,000 extra planes a year to Heathrow. With that sort of increase, it's going to be pretty hard to argue that overall noise levels won't increase. We're going to see London and the south-east under an even louder sky of sound."
Johnson set out three options for a four-runway hub to the east of London: two sites in the Thames estuary and a massively transformed Stansted. Boris Johnson, the mayor of London, who has proposed closing Heathrow in favour of a new hub airport east of the capital, said: "There will be more pigs flying than aircraft if we are to believe the claim that three runways at Heathrow will make less noise than two."
Heathrow's proposals mark a new juncture in its continuing expansion campaign, as it has previously not been drawn on specific plans for new runways. The airport said that, of its three proposals, it would prefer one of the two western options, but it added that the choice was a political decision to be taken by the government rather than one to be made by the airport operator. Each plan had different costs and benefits, it said.
Matthews said: "We're not the people to make that social judgment between noise, housing and economic benefits."
But he said the airport recognised the uncertainty it was causing and called on the commission and governments to decide and to act as soon as possible. "Whether we do nothing, move, or shut down has impacts locally and nationally," he said. "I think local people deserve a thorough examination of the issues and a quick decision."
Heathrow's move comes two days after Boris Johnson set out his own plans, including turning Heathrow into a garden city to house 250,000 people.
Johnson proposed three options for a four-runway hub: two sites in the Thames estuary and a radically transformed Stansted.
Heathrow disputed the mayor's claims that a new estuary airport could be built by 2029, pointing to the lack of necessary transport infrastructure and capacity to house the tens of thousands of workers needed to service it. The airport's development director, John Holland-Kaye, said: "You would have to build a new city the size of Milton Keynes to support a new airport. It's not about runways but everything that goes with it."
The theoretical debates about the economic benefits of airport expansion have been forced to develop into concrete proposals by the Airports Commission, led by Sir Howard Davies, which set a deadline of this Friday for submissions for long-term options for growth.The theoretical debates about the economic benefits of airport expansion have been forced to develop into concrete proposals by the Airports Commission, led by Sir Howard Davies, which set a deadline of this Friday for submissions for long-term options for growth.
Both Heathrow and the mayor share the view that the south-east needs a larger hub airport – that is, one with enough connecting flights and passengers to make more long-haul routes to emerging markets feasible. Heathrow and the mayor share the view that the south-east needs a larger hub airport: that is, one with enough connecting flights and passengers to make feasible more long-haul routes to emerging markets.
The commission was set up by David Cameron last year to draw the sting from an increasingly toxic political issue – although many accused the government of kicking the issue into the long grass. The commission plans to announce a shortlist of feasible new airport or runway options in late 2013, requesting more evidence for detailed study next year, and will only give its final recommendations after the general election in 2015. The commission was set up by David Cameron last year to draw the sting from an increasingly toxic political issue, although many accused the government of kicking the issue into the long grass.
The commission plans to announce a shortlist of feasible new airport or runway options in late 2013, and has requested more evidence for detailed study next year. It will give its final recommendations only after the general election in 2015.
Business groups quickly lent support. The British Chambers of Commerce said it backed Heathrow's plans, as well as ones for new runways at Gatwick and Stansted. The Institute of Directors said expanding Heathrow was the best option and could be "done in a sensitive way".
Hounslow council, which opposes expansion but wants to see the airport survive as the major employer for the borough, said the new north-west runway plan had come "out of the blue" but was potentially less damaging than the other options.
The deputy leader, Colin Ellar, welcomed commitments on noise but said more detail was needed.
However, Greenpeace said Heathrow's plans "simply extend the shadow hanging over west London to blight more villages and more lives with noise, pollution and the threat of demolition. It's time they realised Londoners will make sure their zombie runway will never be built."