Morning:
8°c
Boris calls for airport in east instead of Heathrow expansion
Evening Standard21 Jan 2008
Boris Johnson has said that Heathrow expansion should cease in favour of a new airport being built to the east of London.
The Tory mayoral candidate said ministers should look at moving the airport, saying Heathrow was a "1960s planning error".
"I would like to look at a variety of solutions and we should ask the question whether we should have the solution in the Thames estuary."
All four leading mayoral candidates - Mr Johnson, Ken Livingstone, Brian Paddick and the Green's Sian Berry - have appeared in an advertisement condemning plans for a third runway at the airport.
Under the headline "London united", the advertisement said: "All four candidates for London Mayor oppose a third runway at Heathrow. They don't agree on much, but they're all against this."
But the business community said it was "dismayed" at this " shortsightedness". Colin Stanbridge, chief executive of the London Chamber of Commerce and Industry, said: "Additional capacity at the airport is the only way to guarantee London's competitive position... London has spent years working to overtake New York as the world's foremost financial centre - it would be disastrous if that was to be squandered."
Reader views (12)
DON'T DO IT!
- Suzie Humphries, england, rochester, 13/11/2009 14:45
Report abuse
In spite of the fact my part of Surrey we get one plane every 5 minutes overhead I would oppose any new airport in the Thames Estuary or surrounding marshes.
1/ Cost:- A new airport, maintenance buildings and transport infrastructures would be excessive as well as the cost of protection from rising sea levels, storms, regular high winds, frequent winter mists, and other extreme weather conditions + risk of tidal surges.
2/ Environment:- There are thousands of acres of marshland some of which are wildlife reserves and sssi's spread along the edges of the Thames plus recreation sites. The whole Thames estuary is essential for bird migrations and it's loss could be detrimental to the existence of many species of birds.
3/ Danger to passengers: Planes would be taking off into large flocks of birds and that would increase the risk of a crash more than anything normally encountered at Heathrow.
4/ Housing: Thousands of homes are being built in these areas (Thames Gateway) so the effect of noise and other polluting activities as airports will affect them. Most people living in the areas around Heathrow know there was a major airport so should have expected the noise, pollution and changes as par for it's development.
I think that a Heathrow 3rd Runway is far less of an inconvenience than a brand new airport in the Thames Estuary and Heathrow expansion should go ahead.
- Steve Fowles, Warlingham, UK, 14/08/2008 15:27
Report abuse
Hong Kong had a similar problem; a bigger airport was required, but there was no space for it. The solution was simple, build an island!
London has plenty of space in the Thames estuary. Building there would allow for further expansion, and will stop the possibility of aircraft coming down in built up areas. I was brought up in Southall and remember the crash of 1958.
Costs could be offset by the eventual sale of the current Heathrow.
- John Crane, Brittany, France, 27/03/2008 17:47
Report abuse
A new airport is essential for London. Too many aircraft are flying over London and one day there will be an accident. It doesn't really matter how far the airport is away from the capital with modern high speed transport links. A properly thought out integrated system would not only be viable in a very short period but would be essential for the next fifty to one hundred years. There seems to be rather poor long term planning in the UK. Heathrow is a dreadful airport with appalling connections with London. There's no way that London can remain number one. Too much time wasted. A completely new airport in the Thames estuary is vital.
- Stephen Lediard, Munich, Germany, 27/03/2008 15:32
Report abuse
How far East does he mean perhaps an integrated shipping aircraft port off the coast it would solve much of the noise problems.
- Steve, Leicestershire, 29/01/2008 11:25
Report abuse
We already have airports to the East - what about Stanstead and City airports?
- K, Essex, 21/01/2008 16:32
Report abuse
I wonder if Boris would be so keen to have a new airport to the west -- near Henley on Thames perhaps? Another day another bandwagon for him to jump on.
- Billy Blighty, London, England, 21/01/2008 15:59
Report abuse
Has he never heard of an airport to the East called Stansted Airport - even they are opposing expansion. Where exactly is there space to build another one anyway! The UK is a tiny island - they should remember that.
- Charlie, London, 21/01/2008 15:35
Report abuse
Would not be so bad. The West and Heathrow is obviously not good for more expansion and I guess the East needs some transport too.
- Franky, London NW1, 21/01/2008 15:01
Report abuse
Well actually, both Ray Sirotkin and Boris Johnson are correct in their own ways. Heathrow saw civilian flights from 1946, first from tents and then from a single terminal, the "Queen's Building" (now T2). It wasn't until the 60's that T3 and T1 were built, representing a consolidation of, and major investment in Heathrow's future, so leading inexorably to further development. I suspect those decisions are the ones to which Mr Johnson is referring.
- Brian Clapham, London, 21/01/2008 14:45
Report abuse
Great idea. The land is very cheap there too. Maybe they can use the Stratford Olympic complex as a terminal. Otherwise nothing of that bottomless pit will get returned to Londoners. So overall a very good idea indeed. Anything is also better that saves London airspace from too much noise.
- Peteo, Islington, London, 21/01/2008 14:43
Report abuse
How little Boris knows. Heathrow goes back to the 40s. Obviously history is one of his weaknesses, along with transport, environmental issues, race awareness and education.
- Ray Sirotkin, London,UK, 21/01/2008 12:37
Report abuse
