THE Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) has called a halt to plans to alter flight paths after Scotland’s busiest airport in a move that has been welcomed by local campaigners and environmentalists.
Edinburgh Airport launched its airspace change programme (ACP) last year with a view to modernising its flight paths as its passenger numbers continued to grow. But local campaigners raised concerns about noise and environmental impacts as the number of flights increased.
Two consultations have been held on the issue, before Edinburgh Airport Ltd (EAL) submitted the case to the CAA, which will make the ultimate decision.
However, a CAA spokesman said: “We have informed Edinburgh Airport that we will not be continuing to review Stage 5 of the Airspace Change Process. Our reasons for this decision largely relates to technical aspects of the proposal and this has been fully explained to the airport.
“If and when these issues are addressed, Edinburgh Airport will be free to resubmit their proposal.”
A spokesman for the airport said: “Scotland’s first airspace change programme in over 40 years is a complex exercise involving many organisations. Our ACP is the first of many and it is clear that all of this needs to be co-ordinated with (air traffic control provider) NATS.
“We’re clear that our proposal is the best balance achievable in terms of surrounding communities and our operation, and works for Edinburgh and Scotland.
“We’ll be working with NATS on the co-ordination issues to allow the CAA to restart its analysis so we can develop the airport for the future.”
EAL held an initial consultation on the plans, the biggest of its kind by a UK airport, between June and September last year, to which 5880 responses were submitted — 89 from organisations and elected officials and 5791 from individuals.
The largest number of public responses came from people in West Lothian, closely followed by residents in Edinburgh, with 1659 responses. Just over half of replies from people in the city were classed as negative while 22 per cent were positive and 27 per cent neutral.
Noise concerns and local pollution and environmental issues raised most concerns. There were 3963 respondents to the second consultation, with people in West Lothian accounting for 41 per cent.
Green MSP Mark Ruskell said the airport’s plans had been “arrogantly” rushed through, and said: “Now we learn that even the technical aspects of the proposal were not up to scratch, and we’re pleased to see the CAA taking their duty as regulators seriously and putting a halt to these plans.
“This is only a temporary reprieve for local communities though, as the airport can still re-submit their application. We think there needs to be a halt to unfettered airport expansion whilst we seriously consider Scotland’s connectivity needs.”
A spokesman for campaign group Edinburgh Airport Watch added: “Scotland’s need for a coherent transport policy that takes full account of the health and environmental impacts of the aviation industry has never been more urgent. With most of the flights from Edinburgh Airport being short hops mainly to London, why isn’t this traffic being encouraged to go by train, a far less polluting and divisive form of transport?”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here