Airport expansion

Airport Expansion v Marlhill Copse:

The tall trees at Marlhill Copse literally obstruct airport expansion

The airport admits that tree height management is the reason it bought Marlhill Copse in 2018.
The trees identified for felling in the 'Aerodrome Safeguarding' plan of 2019 do not pose a risk to current flights but do penetrate the 'Object Limitation Surface' for the airport's expansion plans.
Instead of 'Aerodrome Safeguarding', the airport are now using 'Health & Safety' and 'Good Forestry Practice' to justify tree felling.
The recent 'Health & Safety' felling application has resulted in the loss of 3 of the highest trees at Marlhill and the rest of the tall trees will either be felled or severely reduced in height as part of a Woodland Management Plan.
We accept the risk of falling branches and trees in other parts of the city and we can accept this at Marlhill Copse, it is a natural process.
Airport expansion will severely impact the health & safety of local residents, not least from the 80+dB noise and loss of roof tiles when A320 jets take off over neighbouring houses.
Southampton is lacking mature trees (https://www.southampton.ac.uk/news/2018/02/southampton-trees.page), yet tree maturity is being used as a justification to fell.
The negative description of 'non-indigenous' and 'non-native' species (and justification for felling) ignores the fact that it was an ornamental carriage drive planted with exotic species most of which are not invasive.
The 'Special Character' of Marlhill Copse is subjective and should not be for the airport to define. The defining character of Marlhill Copse (even if given to the community in 5 years) will be that it includes no tall trees.
Don’t be fooled – this is all about airport expansion; it is not about 'Health & Safety' or ‘Good Forestry Practice.’

Should the tree cover the circle?

Contact: MarlhillCopse999@gmail.com

Planes take off over Marlhill Copse perfectly safely at the moment.

At the moment Southampton is a regional airport. The people of Southampton will continue to fly (like it or not). Therefore there will continue to be a need for a regional airport.

We do not need another London airport in Southampton/Eastleigh.

March 2020 - Why did the airport buy Marlhill Copse?

The issue of these trees is inextricably linked to the expansion of Southampton airport (the airport still intends to go ahead with the application to Eastleigh for the runway extension). There is no other credible reason why the airport bought this woodland under its flightpath. On two previous occasions the airport previously failed to reduce the height of trees on the grounds of air-safety. In 1983 and 2003 this issue that would have only applied when the types of plane then used were fully laden. The airport is now wanting to fell these trees on the supposed basis of public safety of residents and users of the copse. They argue that this is their duty as a responsible landowner. It seems clear to me that the airport bought Marlhill so it could put itself in this position. It is no coincidence that the 3 Monterey pines currently under threat are amongst the tallest at Marlhill and were previously listed as being a threat to the safety of fully-laden planes taking off to the south.

There will be some people who are not opposed to airport expansion. However, we hope they would agree that if these trees need to be sacrificed in order to facilitate the expansion (fully laden A320s would require both the runway extension and reduced tree height at Marlhill Copse), that this reason should be addressed in the open with appropriate, well-informed debate - not cloaked as a benign health & safety issue.

Google Sites

Report abuse