How many residents are/will be in the London City Airport Noise Contours?

£1 For Justice

Approx 100,000 residents live in the noise contours of London City Airport.

120,000 flights are planned to travel over them.

If each gave just £1 to FTF the legal challenge fund via PayPal - they'd have access to justice in the London Borough Newham.

It's clear that justice has to be pursued in Newham.

Donate your £1 (or more if you can)

London City Airport - Are You Living In A Noise Hell, Whoops, Contour?

These are the latest noise contours released by London City Airport. We are unable to confirm whether these contours are based only on ACTUAL recorded data by the airport rather than estimated cobbled up figures from technical aircraft books (as they had 8 years where they failed to reliably and consistently collect actual noise data).

The maps still don't reflect what the communities ACTUALLY experience in terms of noise levels as they are based on averages - and they count the quiet times aswell as the actual noise events - but this is what the airport claims to use to identify properties that are eligible for noise mitigation. The problem is that many of those that are eligible have either not received any mitigation at all, or they have received double glazing, which they alledge is 'inferior' and 'ineffective'.

This feeling would reflect the comment from a Newham Council officer that London City Airport does not provide the same standard of noise mitigation that other airports do. This is why London City Airport choose to say they mitigate at 57db, 3db earlier than other airports.

What they haven't said is that they might mitigate 3dbs earlier but that what they install is not to the same standard as other airports and in the past residents have been asked to sign a disclaimer to future noise mitigation work upon receiving the windows/air ventiliation systems. The letter to residents who had received noise mitigation bascially asked them to sign to confirm that they had received the installation and also that they would not make any further claims on the airport for noise mitigation works. If they signed they gave up their right to any further noise mitigation in the future. Trebles all round for London CityAirport on that tactic (I'm sure that has saved them a fortune at the expense of residents growing misery at increasing noise levels), fortunately some residents refused to sign the letter.

REMEMBER: If your home was built or given planning permission after June 1998 it is highly unlikely that you will be entitled to any noise mitigation, even if you are in the 60db contour.

We strongly advise any residents receiving noise mitigation from London City Airport not to sign any such similar paperwork, without first seeking legal advice. If you don't know who to go to for legal advice please contact us and we will try to assist in providing information. If you would like a copy of the current Noise contours please email us.

West Thamesmead Residents Monitored by Police Helicopter

Two Thamesmead residents have just reported to us that they have been monitored by a Police Helicopter after taking photographs (such as the one above) in a residential development, in which they live, by the river at West Thamesmead

The helicopter was spotted by the residents around 10 minutes into them taking photographs of the public safety zone area, planes passing and the noise contour areas in Gallions Reach Urban Residential Village, West Thamesmead, Greenwich. The photos were being taken as part of a project to highlight how ignored the area has been by Newham, Greenwich and Hazel Blears, and how it will be blighted by further expansion, and yet 99% will not be entitled to any noise mitigation whatsoever.

The area has now finally been revealed by London City Airport to be affected by 57db and 60db average noise levels - this is prior to the 50% increase in flights. The area is also going to be blanketed by the crash zone - putting 100s of homes in the area where the Department for Transport regard the risk to human life from an aviation incident higher than other areas. Yes, this is the area in which John Prescott visited and hailed it as a beacon example of the new Thames Gateway housing just 3 years ago. The Department for Communities and Local Government used to have the area listed on their website, until it courted negative press, and suddenly all reference was removed.

The residents ascended a man made hill called 'Gallions Hill' which has a panoramic view of South East London. It was as they took in the view from the top of the hill that the Police helicopter arrived above them, hovering.

Now we are not aware that it is an offence for residents to walk, nor take photographs of their local area - or IS IT? Are residents in West Thamesmead to assume that they have lost their freedom to walk and take photographs in the area in which they live?

Nice to see that the Met are spending their resources so wisely in such difficult economic times. We wonder can we assume the cost of sending out the helicopter to monitor local residents in their own neighbourhood is added to the 5 million security bill that City Airport have passed to London Taxpayers over the past 2 years? Or will it be an additional cost?

As it happens the rain saw off the residents, but they also tell us that once they had arrived back home, within about 20 minutes a Police car was seen cruising up the riverside access drive.

We'll be uploading a short video of the Police helicopter shortly, and linking the most recently available noise contours.

Mapping Project - Royal Docks & London City Airport

LB Newham Continues To Ignore It's Obligations

After months of asking LB Newham to monitor noise levels in their communities, residents are now coming to the conclusion that Newham don't want to know the real noise levels because they present an inconvenient truth. There are still no actual reliable noise readings for the communities around the airport after almost a year of residents asking.

London 21 and UCL carried out a noise mapping project in the Royal Docks during the Spring and the noise levels recorded, and averaged out far exceeded those 'estimates' by the airport. Since the discovery of the document which stated that London City Airport had not taken accurate noise data collection for 7 years residents have looked to Newham to fulfill the obligation.

Newham have attended a few homes with a handheld noise monitor - on one or two occasions taking just a few sets of readings in a short time period. To take representative readings such readings need to be taken at different times of the day - just as the London21 noise mapping project required. But considering LB Newham has a legal obligation to ensure that noise readings are taken, and LCA are incapable of doing this, then Newham should have themselves set up their own noise stations around the vicinity of the airport.

LB Newham have always had to be pursued by residents for weeks if not months before taking readings, which unfortunately have transpired as inadequate. Now it appears that some residents in the Royal Docks areas are being told that LB Newham is not willing to take further readings. This is despite the fact that the law is not on their side, and we suspect the ombudsman won't be either.

In the absence of LCA (and LB Newham) doing their job properly you'd think LB Newham would want to look after their council tax paying residents - but no, they appear to be too busy burying the bad news for the progress and benefit of business, and perhaps keeping their Mayor happy? That term 'Robinocracy' is spreading.

The Great Web Of Deception

There are a lot of things about this application that have been uncovered during the last 9 months or so. Most of all it is the level of deception that the community have been fed in the absence of real facts, and accurate information that has been the most concerning.

1. Residents are still being told - ''noise mitigation will be offered to all households in the noise contours to deal with the increased noise levels".

This is a really good one to get rid of objecting residents, who haven't seen or had time to read the details of the noise mitigation programme, and whose main concern are the noise levels.

There's two problems with this: firstly the noise contours are based on estimates, secondly any home built of given planning permission after 1997 is not eligible for assistance to sound insulation. You may be offered motorised ventilation simply because opening your windows will be unbearable with the level of noise from jets - but this will not reduce the noise experienced from 50% more planes at intervals of 90seconds!

2. Noise contours - residents have been led to believe that the current noise contours are only estimated for the past year.

Estimated noise contours are a real money saver for London City Airport (think of all those properties which may be eligible for noise mitigation for the past 7 years but haven't been identified as 'eligible'!)and rather helpful when you want to get an application through to expand to a major airport, in the middle of a residential area when the noise levels really matter.

As you will know if you read this blog they have been estimated for over 6 years. Why? Because LCA and Newham don't care and appear to have had some sort of amnesia with regards to the Section 106 requirements since the document was written. But don't worry, a nice, new shiny section 106 with a 50% increase in flights will make everything much, much better, so we are told!

3. Employment Figures - the great myth

Jobs, jobs, jobs - a great tool to try and bury the outweighing negatives to any community! After all who would dare stand up and say no to more 'estimated' jobs? Even if they are just words in the quest to get approval to make loadsamoney, even if it does mean an additional 46,000 people will have to live in sealed up homes, children's development will be affected, and cardiovascular conditions continue to soar in Newham and Greenwich in the areas most affected by the noise levels? Stephen Timm's is right behind on the job issue, shame his equivalent in health isn't right behind the people on the health impacts! Still the price put on the head of a resident, appears to be far less value than that of business - check out the PSZ guidance to see this in practice! But we are sure with Newham's excellent track record in enforcement they will of course follow up and independently check the validity of such job growth claims!!

The airport never, ever quotes that it directly employs just over 400 people. Instead it likes to think it can isolate other job growth in the area and take all the credit for it themselves.

So just over 400 jobs soon become 2000 jobs 'created' but they consistently omit in identifying the distinction between the two categories. They could give lessons on how to purposely mislead the reader - and we thought it was all ''open and honest''! When members of the LCACC also start to express their unhappiness with the figures and projections of job growth, well that says everything.

Itsy, bitsy, spider....

Newham Council/LCA - The Section 106 And The Shame of It All

Fight the Flights is waiting for a response from Newham Council with regard to London City Airport failing to follow the Section 106 Agreement with regard to providing accurate and actual noise data for the past 7 years. As you will recall, London City Airport have failed in monitoring the actual noise levels for all those years and it is those levels which should also be used for noise contour maps and for the classification of aircraft to enable the correct amount of noise factored movements to take place. This is why no actual data is submitted with the application to expand - only estimates.

Newham Council is responsible for making sure that the Section 106 Agreement is adhered to, and clearly in 7 years they have not based on our current knowledge. How long can it take to resolve an issue with noise monitoring......in Newham...more than 7 years - that has to be a record and a real bonus for London City Airport operations.

However we await Newham's response and will consider the legal position when it is received. We currently feel that Newham Council has been negligent in their position to ensure the health and safety of residents and of maladministration of the section 106 agreement enforcement. But we are getting a good picture of how the LB of Newham behaves towards residents from looking at a variety of planning applications which are all equally as controversial in how: consultations have been carried out and also of the lack of enforcement of conditions and obligations in the Section 106s.....hardly a case of lead by example.

And where we ask are all the local councillors in this....heads buried in the sand? It is actually quite shameful that none of them appear to have raised the lack of noise monitoring at the airport in 7 whole years. Scandalous. It's the residents that voted them in so you'd think the local councillors would be in touch enough to address such important issues which affect the health and safety of their constituents. But still they can also be voted out. However if any of the local councillors can provide us with any information indicating that they have addressed this issue, and have fought for and represented the health and welfare of the residents in the areas affected, we would be more than happy to put a posting on to indicate that.

House Purchasing In the Radius Of London City Airport - Are you being told the truth?

Not only will existing residential areas around the airport suffer from increasingly annoying levels of noise from jets upon any expansion - but some of the new developments will be pushed into the second loudest noise contours surrounding London City Airport. That is not going to be a nice place to be at all if expansion goes ahead. Silvertown Quays, we recall is going to be subjected to a whopping 79db laeq. So in reality the noise levels are probably in the 90dbs range.

Interestingly when you look at the marketing materials of some developments by the airport there is no mention of the planned LCA expansion, masterplan, nor of the noise levels experienced or of any possible increase in those levels. How very strange that is. And the same is true of some agents showing prospective buyers of properties for re-sale on the south side of the river - not a mention of the planned expansion of flights - even upon asking directly about it!

Aviation expansion and residential areas do not mix - but so long as councils play down the levels of noise and the disruption from LCA and give planning approval, developers and estate agents will build and sell you the properties. Of course the problem comes after you have purchased the property and realise when you can't have your windows open, you are sealed in your home like a prisoner to drown out the sound of planes, can't spend time outside and you lose money on your property. Still, as long as the councils get their council tax (of which contributes to LCA's £7million security bill) that's all they care about.

And what motivates councils to approve the current level of housebuilding around LCA and also for some not to object to LCA expansion (we still haven't heard Sir Robin Wales's stand on this!). Well it is only one thing - greed. Once you have purchased your home, d0n't expect any help from the developer, Council or local Councillors because in the case of Newham and Greenwich it appears they'd rather not know.

Yes, it really is the case of fleecing the residents who live in the area and whom contribute to the community and regeneration for the case of collecting the gold coins. The Council seems to want it all ways (something they share with LCA!) - but it just doesn't work if you want to build a thriving residential community and the sooner they realise that housebuilding and aviation expansion in the high density housing areas of east and south east London is in conflict - the sooner they can allow the Thames Gateway plans to go ahead and get on with some decent, sustainable and community-building regeneration plans.

We can only wait and see if Newham Council puts residents best interests first: all 46,000+ of them in the noise contours and the many thousands beyond, or whether there will be a public inquiry which may highlight a few of those spun deceptions that are out there floating around from specific sources.

Enough is enough.