Bristol City Council has formally opposed the latest proposal to expand Bristol Airport’s annual passenger capacity from 10.5 million to 15 million. While Labour councillors abstained and Conservatives supported the plan, the majority backed a motion opposing the expansion due to environmental and community impact concerns.
This contentious proposal follows earlier permission granted two years ago to expand to 12 million passengers—a development that has yet to be implemented. Bristol Airport aims not only to increase passenger numbers but also to lengthen the runway, introduce new long-haul flights to the US and the Middle East, and allow more night flights, heightening worries about noise and local disturbances.
Ahead of the council meeting on July 8, protesters gathered outside City Hall, reflecting widespread local unease. Green Party Councillor Izzy Russell, who grew up near the airport, spoke passionately against the expansion. She described the daily disruption caused by aircraft noise, the impact on local wildlife, worsening air quality, increased road congestion, and a broader erosion of democratic voices opposing the project.
READ MORE: Somerset Cycleway Sparks Criticism Over £2.7 Million Cost and Low Usage
READ MORE: Cult Fashion Brand Cambridge Satchel Opens New Store in Bath
Councillor Russell urged regional leadership to reconsider past positions, calling for a comprehensive study on the cumulative environmental effects of airport expansions nationwide. She emphasized that alternatives like sustainable aviation fuel currently constitute less than three percent of usage and that electric or hydrogen planes remain unfeasible in the near future.
The debate echoes a six-year battle that ended in 2023 with court approval for the airport’s earlier expansion. However, this new proposal is stirring fresh controversy, including the construction of a multi-storey car park and concerns about the narrow, congested A38 road connecting the airport to Bristol. Though mass transit solutions have been proposed to ease congestion, progress remains stalled.
Labour councillors voiced a pragmatic perspective, suggesting that passengers seeking international flights would simply travel to larger airports if Bristol Airport’s expansion were blocked, potentially increasing overall emissions. Labour Councillor Susan Kollar highlighted the climate emergency, recognizing the airport’s emissions but questioning the efficacy of halting expansion as a primary solution. She advocated for decarbonizing the aviation sector, cutting demand, and investing in alternatives such as high-speed rail. She also proposed a frequent flyer levy to target the disproportionate emissions caused by repeat flyers.
Conservatives defended the airport’s role as a major employer and economic driver, emphasizing the benefits to local jobs and the region’s connectivity. Conservative Councillor Richard Eddy criticized the Green Party’s stance as unrealistic and detrimental to Bristol’s long-term interests.
While the council’s opposition does not directly block expansion, it amplifies community resistance and may influence planning decisions. The responsibility for granting permission resides with North Somerset Council, with further appeals possible at the government Planning Inspectorate. Previously, the High Court ultimately sanctioned the airport’s expansion.
Similar opposition has emerged from neighboring Bath and North East Somerset Council, underscoring the regional significance of the debate on Bristol Airport’s future.