I live next to major UK airport and can hardly breathe - it's going to get worse

If it were not for the huge airport complex opposite, Wigmore’s residential streets built in the 1970s and 80s would be just like the many others across the UK. The first sign that something is afoot here are notices attached to fence panels reading in capital letters: “Please do not park here. Spaces needed for residents. Thank you.” There are few things more British than a homemade, sternly written laminated sign. Stewardesses can also be seen wearing their uniforms and pulling along their suitcases on their way to work. The sound of jet engines from Luton Airport travels across Eaton Green Road to the estates, and residents, many of whom have lived there for decades, have, to an extent, grown used to it. But the government is attempting to fight a crusade for growth, and Luton has become a key battlefield.

After a third runway at Heathrow got the green light from Rachel Reeves in January, an expansion of the Bedfordshire commuter town’s airport was approved at the beginning of April by the Transport Secretary, Heidi Alexander. This was despite a recommendation from the Planning Inspectorate that the scheme should be rejected due to environmental concerns. Officials hope the project will result in annual passenger numbers almost doubling to 32million by 2043. But, as campaigners continue to fight the upgrade, a general feeling of powerless acceptance that the plans will now go ahead seems to abide on the ground.

Residents still suggest that life right next to the runway already has many downpoints, and these will be exacerbated by the airport’s upgraded capacity. Although, they do also acknowledge that locals could take up the roles it creates, which may prove especially crucial as the town’s 120-year-old Vauxhall van plant is scheduled to close this month, resulting in the loss of more than 1,100 jobs.

John Anderson, 78, has lived in the area all his life, and can see planes taking off through his bedroom window. The retired Renault quality engineer stops to speak to the Express while on his way to meet his wife at the shops. “The air pollution is very bad,” he says. “You can hardly breathe when you go out in the back garden. If the wind is in the right direction, it’s overpowering, it really is.” He adds: “Obviously, we’re not too keen on the expansion. The air pollution is only going to get worse. I’ve always lived in the area, but now it’s just getting worse.” When asked whether he had any sympathy for the economic motivations behind the scheme, Mr Anderson says: “I can understand the reasons why they want to do it. But obviously the people voting for it are the people who don’t live in this vicinity.

I can’t see as though they truly understand what the implications of their actions are going to be. But I can understand people or MPs wanting to push it. It’s going to bring a lot of money to the area and to the town.” But before walking on, the pensioner made sure to highlight again that the expansion will not do those living right next to the airport “any favours at all”, including holidaymakers parking their cars in the estate, sometimes for weeks.

The Express is told later by a different local that some “militant” individuals go as far as to egg these vehicles and interfere with their windscreen wipers. The less combative tend to leave a passive aggressive note. “You come round here in the summer and the congestion is terrible”, Mr Anderson adds. The council, he understands, is “looking into it”, but residents are against paying for yellow lines and other deterrents.

Equally against the project is Sandra Winter, 62, who has lived in the area for 29 years. She uses Wigmore Wildlife Fields and park, which maps suggest will soon be built on, to have a stroll and sit and watch the planes. “I’m well against it,” she says while standing in her doorway, the front of her house adorned with greenery. “It’s going to destroy all of my walking area. You’ve got the Red Kites, you can watch them feed. You’ve got the rabbits.” But Ms Winter seems to have surrendered to the idea. She adds: “It’s such a shame, but needs must.

"We bobsleighed down there when the kids were young. Whatever happens, you won’t be able to go and watch the rabbits. I’m not going to sort of vote against it but there’s so much traffic already.” Before suggesting the Express speaks to her neighbours across the road next, Ms Winter concludes: “I plan on moving in about 10 years’ time anyway, but it’ll be done by then. If I’d have been staying here longer, I would have thought about whether it would have devalued the house. I think it would put it up, I don’t know.”

Adrian Rigden, 66, has lived with his wife Gillian, 62, on the estate since the early 80s. At that time, the airport across the way just had a grass runway, he says, and, when planes passed over the couple’s house, the television momentarily lost its signal. Mr Rigden then quipped that he got some peace during Covid-19 lockdowns when flights were grounded.

While unloading shopping bags from his car boot, he adds that he is not looking forward to “more noise and more pollution”. On the outside of his house is a vent, which gets filled up with a black substance. “Years ago, they had a pond next door,” the retired industrial electrician says, “and if the wind was blowing the wrong way, it looked like someone had tipped some oil on it.”

To a certain degree, he is worried about how this may be affecting the health of Gillian, who has asthma, adding that cars are an “easy target” for anti-pollution measures, and planes “don’t use gallons, they use tonnes of fuel”. “We get no sort of choice from the airport,” Mr Rigden adds. “They just do what they want to do. It’s like Big Brother against the little man. I can understand it, but they’re going from something like 19million [passengers] to 32million. And where they’re going to get all the extra people from, God knows.”

Walking her three-month-old puppy in a windy Wigmore Park is China Rush, 32, a Metropolitan Police officer. She says: “I’m very much against it. I’ve got a dog, and this is very close to my house. Otherwise, I’d have to travel quite a lot, and I wouldn’t have time to do it. Along with the kids that come here, they can play. We meet a lot of people here to do dog walks. My other half is a dog trainer as well, and often uses the fields. So, money and free time, it would affect us quite a lot.”

She too mentions noise pollution and the “annoyance” of cars parking in the street. Light pollution also affects her at night, she says. Also using the huge expanse of grass for dog walking is Kari Self, 57, a canine business consultant and licensed home breeder. While putting some canine friends in her car, she says: “I’m sitting on the fence, really. We’re going to lose all of this where we walk our dogs, and nature. I don’t understand what they’re building on landfill site. An awful lot of pollution is going to be brought back up into the air. But the income it will bring in for the town will be good.” She was with Sandra Bosher, 54, a property manager. She is not from the area, but speculates: “In five years’ time, the planes might be using hydrogen fuel. The hard part is finding the balance between progress and keeping green spaces on some level for people.”

Mark, 51, a postman, is also finishing up his dog walk. Saddened, he says: “It’s a lovely area that’s being concreted over. But that’s what they say progress is nowadays, don’t they?” He also expresses scepticism about whether the jobs will be given to locals.

KD Campbell, 28, has recently moved to Wigmore from Cheshunt in Hertfordshire with his family. Standing in his doorway, he says: “Well they do say Luton is one of the worst airports.” The security worker then suggests that living opposite the airport is not much different to life in his former abode, which was “right next to the train station”. He could “hear trains constantly going past every minute”. “It’s not so much of a problem for me,” Mr Campbell adds, “because it’s just people travelling to me”.

The expansion is necessary because of people’s travel needs and the growing population overall, he says, and neither a benefit nor a problem, “just something that’s happening”. This sentiment was shared by one of KD’s neighbours, who could not stop to chat. Getting in his car, he says: “You can’t live near an airport and not expect to get noise from it.”

LADACAN, a campaign group opposed to the expansion, tells the Express that it is taking legal advice on whether there are grounds to challenge the government’s decision by calling for a Judicial Review. A spokesperson, Andrew Lambourne, says that it is “daft to take a blinkered view of the alleged benefits of airport expansion, without considering the costs”. He predicts that the M1 will be “gridlock” far more often at Junction 10, which is one of costs “borne by ordinary people, while the government happily allows frequent flyers to continue to create disproportionate and damaging carbon emissions”.

The Department for Transport says that it is not able to comment during the appeal process. Ms Alexander set out her reasons for approval in a decision letter. A government source said after the go-ahead was given: “Expansion will deliver huge growth benefits for Luton with thousands of good, new jobs and a cash boost for the local council which owns the airport. This is the fourteenth development consent order approved by this Labour Government, demonstrating we will stop at nothing to deliver economic growth and new infrastructure as part of our plan for change.”

Paul Kehoe CBE, independent Chair of Luton Rising, the Luton Council company that owns the airport and associated assets for community benefit, says: “We are pleased that the Transport Secretary has approved our Development Consent Order for the long-term and sustainable growth of our airport. In our application we outlined how expansion will deliver transformative benefits for Luton, the region and the UK, amounting to nearly 11,000 new jobs and additional annual economic activity of up to £1.5bn. In arriving at her decision, the Secretary of State agreed that these outweigh other considerations.

“Our proposals are supported by more than 10,000 people from Luton and beyond who put their names to a community-led petition and more than 130 businesses who signed an open letter. From the beginning, we have understood that expansion is not welcomed by everybody and brings environmental concerns in particular. We believe we have gone further to address these than any other airport expansion programme in the UK with a unique and groundbreaking Green Controlled Growth framework.

“This will set limits for noise, air quality and traffic impacts, and also greenhouse gas emissions from the operation of the airport, that ultimately would allow an independently chaired Environmental Scrutiny Group, which will receive regular reports and monitoring, to constrain growth if any of the limits are not met.

“The project requires part of the existing Wigmore Park, and so we have committed to extending its footprint on adjoining land that we have already acquired, improving facilities and access for people of all abilities, and moving it further away from the runway while retaining its existing main entrance. Habitat replacement forms an important part of our commitment to deliver ten per cent biodiversity growth as well.

“Skills development is a top priority, and we have recently opened a major new skills and business hub for Luton which is already attracting significant new inward investment and where we are supporting Luton Council’s work to ensure that local people are well-placed to take up current and future employment opportunities.”

The Express also contacted the area’s MP, Rachel Hopkins, and Luton Airport for comment.