BAA yesterday outlined its preferred option for a second runway at Stansted airport, claiming it would be £1bn cheaper to build and have a smaller environmental impact than originally estimated. Its proposal immediately ran into a chorus of protest from airlines, local authorities, residents and environmental campaigners.
BAA said its preferred option - one of seven it is putting out to public consultation - would cost £2.7bn against the £3.7bn envisaged in the government white paper on air transport published in 2003. It estimated that improving road and rail links would cost another £500m, half the initial projection.
The company, which operates a number of UK airports, said its plan involved building a shorter runway than originally envisaged in the white paper but one that would still be able to handle the biggest civil airliners, the Airbus A380 and the Boeing 747. It said the new development would mean 627 hectares of land would be lost rather than 700, so the number of dwellings that would have to be demolished would be reduced and fewer people would be affected by noise.
BAA wants to complete the first phase of its expansion of Stansted, including the new runway, by 2013. Together with an upgrade of facilities, that would double the airport's capacity to 50 million passengers. "We have worked very hard in the last two years to ensure that Stansted G2 will deliver great value to the UK economy, to our airlines and to people using the airport," said Mike Clasper, BAA's chief executive. "We've also examined in great detail the environmental impacts of the project in order to ensure they are reduced as far as possible."
BAA's plan, which will be the subject of a public inquiry, is a central plank in the government's 30-year aviation strategy for the south-east. A third runway is planned for Heathrow, but not until 2015.
Airlines have expressed concern about how BAA would pay for the expansion of Stansted, with some concerned it would seek to put up prices at other airports to cross-subsidise its spending there. BAA declined to be drawn but warned that if it were unable to negotiate a satisfactory settlement on its prices with the Civil Aviation Authority, the Stansted project would be slowed down.
Yesterday the Stansted Airport Consultative Committee, which represents airlines using Stansted, including Ryanair and easyJet, described the project as "gold-plated folly". It said: "BAA has not consulted with the very airlines it hopes will deliver new passengers and refuses to explain how more passengers can be attracted by pushing fares up." BAA argued that expanding Stansted would boost competition and drive fares lower.
Local authorities condemned the plan. Essex and Hertfordshire county councils and the East Herts and Uttlesford district councils, which have twice challenged plans to expand Stansted, vowed to continue their opposition. Lord Hanningfield, leader of Essex county council, said: "BAA should be under no illusion that local residents and their elected representatives will oppose this expansion tooth and nail. There is simply not a need for another airport in the UK larger than Heathrow."
The Stop Stansted Expansion campaign group said the new runway would be "an environmental catastrophe". Its chairman, Peter Sanders, said: "BAA's scaled-back perimeter would do nothing to alleviate the widespread impact that the project ... would have across Essex, Hertfordshire and Suffolk."
