Sunday, February 14, 2010

PRESS RELEASE: Civil Aviation Authority admits controversial new flight path in East London was on the cards 5 years before residents knew about it


In a meeting with Fight the Flights held last week the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) admitted that the controversial new flight path in East London was on the cards five years before people were told about it.

Last May a new flight path was introduced for planes taking off from City Airport. Aircraft were routed over areas of Tower Hamlets, Waltham Forest and Redbridge which previously had few planes (1). The tens of thousands of residents under the new flight path can now get a plane overhead every few minutes at the busiest times of the day. The new, wider flight path was introduced because the CAA ruled that the large number of jet planes using the airport could not make the narrow turn onto the previous flight path safely (2). But the CAA admitted to Fight the Flights that it had known this would become a problem five years earlier.

Fight the Flights Chair Anne-Marie Griffin said, “We are shocked that the CAA, and we assume that London City Airport knew, that new flight paths would need to be introduced so many years ago. If they had been more straightforward with residents, many more people would have objected to the airport’s recent application to increase flight numbers by 50% (3).The CAA will review the flight path later this year. The London Boroughs of Waltham Forest and Redbridge, as well as a number of MPs, have expressed concern at the standard of consultation before the flight path was introduced.

ENDS

Notes for Editors:

(1). The wider arc of the new flight path goes over Hackney, Leytonstone, Wanstead, Gants Hill and Newbury Park. To the east (used when an east wind is blowing) it goes over Dagenham towards Hornchurch. (full press release with maps in attachment)

(2). The number of jets using City Airport has risen:

Air Transport Movements – % of Jets

1999 43

2000 33

2001 29

2002 25

2003 26

2004 28

2005 36

2006 37

2007 50

2008 58

2009 63 (Jan-Sept)

(3). FTF launched a legal challenge in September 2009 to Newhams decision to grant approval to flight expansion. There are three aspects to Fight the Flights claim. In summary they are (1) that Newham failed to have regard to the Government’s policy on climate change and aviation; (2) that Newham failed to consult relevant neighbouring local authorities; and (3) Newham failed to consult the residents of those boroughs. A copy of the legal grounds are available on request / or on our website at http://fighttheflights.com/. FTF founded in 2007, is a non party political residents group covering all areas affected by London City Airport operations.

(4).FTF works with not only the community and NGO‘s, but also lobby’s decision makers.

Fightthefights.com http://londoncityairportfighttheflights.blogspot.com/

For more information:

FTF Spokesperson: 07984 300558

Press Release dated 15/2/10

Wednesday, February 10, 2010

Redbridge Tackle London City Airport On Effects and Opposes ALL Further Expansion


Roger Hampson
Chief Executive
Direct line 020 8708 2100
Fax 020 8478 2356
roger.hampson@redbridge.gov.uk
Town Hall, PO Box 2, High Road
Ilford, Essex. IG1 1DD


Kellie Heath
Consultation Administrator
London City Airport
City Aviation House
Royal Docks
London
E16 2PB


Our ref
Your ref
Date 12th January 2010
 
 
 
Dear Ms Heath,

London City Airport Draft Noise Action Plan

Thank you for consulting the London Borough of Redbridge on the draft Noise Action Plan. This letter is the Council’s response to the document and with a broader scope it addresses the matters of airport expansion and recent changes to flight paths as they affect this Borough.
You may be aware that recent changes to flight paths in this part of London and Newham Council’s approval to a planning application to increase the number of aircraft movements in and out of City Airport has been subject of considerable concern amongst residents within Redbridge. As a result, this issue was raised at Full Council on 19th November 2009 when the following Motion was agreed:

"This Council recognises residents' concern over (a) the expansion of London City Airport, and (b) flight path changes relating to "stacking" for London Heathrow Airport, believes the increased number of flights using these airports - and the associated noise nuisance and environmental impact - is detrimental to Redbridge residents.

This Council further notes:-
(i) the failure of the London Borough of Newham to consult it in connection with the planning application for the expansion of London City Airport.
(ii) the representations made through London Councils Transport and Environment Committee in response to the consultation by National Air Traffic Services (NATS) on Terminal Control North (TCN) concerning proposed changes to aircraft movement over London and London Councils response to that consultation dated 12 June 2008 raising concerns about the Government’s policy on airport expansion and the likely noise, air quality and safety concerns of concentrating flight paths, particularly over densely populated areas;
(iii) the Civil Aviation Authority’s notice to NATS dated 20 February 2009 requiring NATS to implement the proposals for TCN notwithstanding the opposition expressed through the public consultation;
(iv) the report presented to the Planning and Regeneration Scrutiny Committee on 24 June 2009 considering the potential impact on the London Borough of Redbridge of a possible third runway and sixth terminal at Heathrow Airport.

This Council opposes further expansion or changes to flight paths or the mode of operation of airports (including without limitation any extension to the hours of operation of airports whether temporary or permanent) which would result in an increase in aircraft noise suffered by residents of this Borough.”

As a consequence of the above I was asked to write to the Civil Aviation Authority and the National Air Traffic Control Service (NATS) to ask what action has been taken to consult residents of Redbridge on the changes to flight paths, particularly from London City Airport.
I was also asked to write to the London Borough of Newham condemning the failure to consult this Council and its decision to allow further expansion of London City Airport, stressing the negative impact this decision will have, in addition to the NATS TCN proposals on the residents of Redbridge.

Additionally, Members instructed that I write to you in response to the consultation on the draft Noise Action Plan 2009-2014 stating that this council is opposed to any further expansion of London City Airport, changes to its mode of operation, hours of operation, flight paths or any increase in the number of flights which would result in any increase in aircraft noise suffered by residents of this Borough.

In this respect it is considered that the Noise Action Plan, in its current form, does not go far enough in determining the noise impact of aircraft movement across the Borough's north of Newham, particularly Redbridge. As such, any mitigation measures to limit the impact of aircraft noise have not been considered.

The serious detrimental affect on the residents of Redbridge resulting from CAA/NATS changes to the departure patterns from LCA is clearly shown by the number of complaints received by Redbridge and LCA regarding aircraft noise. The implementation of the approved planning application will have an even greater impact on Redbridge and this must be considered in the Noise Action Plan.

Minutes of the LCA Consultative Committee on 6th October 2009 record that 9 complaints were received by LCA from Redbridge residents between July and September 2009, some of which specifically refer to changes in flight paths. It appears that these complaints were preceded by a number of years up to June 2009 in which LCA did not receive any complaints from people living in this Borough. Also noted in the Minutes is the report of a noticeable increase in the number of noise complaints from residents living to the north of the Airport and that they might be attributable to the changes in the Standard Instrument Departures flown by aircraft leaving the Airport which had been implemented recently by the CAA and NATS.

It is noted from section 8.0 of the Noise Action Plan that there is an s.106 Agreement between LCA and LB Newham for the reporting of environmental noise complaints. We can refer to LCACC minutes for dates and brief descriptions of complaints. However, while complaints continue to be received from Redbridge residents we request that LCA also send this Council additional information on a quarterly basis regarding the investigation, assessment and resolution, if any, of those complaints.

The Noise Action Plan provides no information specific to Redbridge about the noise from aircraft in flight beyond the fact that the Borough is outside the 54/55dB contours and we have no other data that would help an understanding of the recent changes in terms of noise levels. The NATS consultation documents broadly described the changes affecting airspace over Redbridge but did not provide noise contours. In view of the increase in interest and concern about aircraft noise affecting this Borough we request that LCA and your consultant produce modelled noise maps of Redbridge showing Laeq,16h contours at 3dB intervals for the following times and conditions:

1 - just before implementation of the NATS changes at the then current level of aircraft movements
2 - after implementation at the current level of movements, and
3 - after implementation at the maximum permitted level of movements.

If such maps can be provided we would expect them to be based on the current and predicted mixes of aircraft types, SEL/height data, and the typical horizontal distribution of actual flight paths, taking into account their relative spread around or concentration on the route centre lines; NATS stated in Part I, 2.2 of their consultation documents that jets were often unable to follow the then current route.

I would thank you in advance for your co-operation in this matter and look forward to your response.

Yours sincerely,
 
ROGER HAMPSON
CHIEF EXECUTIVE

Letter provided by courtesy of Redbridge Council through an FOI request.

Monday, February 08, 2010

Noise action plans a sham, finds AEF report

Feb 8, 2010

The Airport ‘noise action plans’ will fail to tackle impacts on local communities, an AEF study has found. European laws designed to help protect communities from noise impacts now demand large airports – as well as roads, railways and built-up areas – to draw up ‘action plans’ for tackling their noise pollution. But the plans written by airports mainly just restate what they already have to do to comply with, local planning requirements, or, at Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted, because of rules put in place by the Government.

AEF has reviewed all the airport draft noise action plans and concluded that not one meets all the requirements of the EC law. The Government now has to decide whether to accept the plans or to send them back.

The report is available here: New Style, Old Story: a review of UK airport noise action plans.

For more comment, see the related press release.

Redbridge Writes to Sir Robin Wales On Lack of Consultation

RogerHampson
ChiefExecutive
www.redbridge.gov.uk
Sir Robin Wales
4th Floor, West Wing
London Borough of Newham
Newham Dockside
1000 Dockside Road
London
E16 2QU

Direct line 020 8708 2100
Fax 020 8478 2356
roger.hampson@redbridge.gov.uk
Town Hall, PO Box 2, High Road
Ilford, Essex. IG1 1DD

Our ref
Your ref
Date 8th December 2009

Dear Sir Robin,

Planning application to increase flights to/ from London City Airport

You may be aware that recent changes to flight paths in this part of London and your Council’s approval to a planning application to increase the number of aircraft movements in and out of City Airport has been subject of considerable concern over recent months amongst residents within Redbridge.

As a result, this issue was raised at Full Council on 19th November 2009 when the Council agreed to recognise residents' concern over (a) the expansion of London City Airport, and (b) flight path changes relating to "stacking" for London Heathrow Airport; it believes that the increased number of flights using these airports and the associated noise nuisance and environmental impact is detrimental to Redbridge residents. The Council decided that it will oppose further expansion or changes to flight paths or the mode of operation of airports (including without limitation any extension to the hours of operation of airports whether temporary or permanent) which would result in an increase in aircraft noise suffered by residents of this Borough.

I was asked to write to the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) and NATS to ask what action they took to consult residents of Redbridge on the changes to flight paths and London City Airport expansion. Additionally, Members instructed that I write to London City Airport in response to their consultation on their proposed Noise Action Plan 2009-2014 stating that this Council is opposed to any further expansion of London City Airport, changes to its mode of operation, hours of operation, flight paths or any increase in the number of flights which would result in any increase in aircraft noise suffered by residents of this Borough.

Also, and my reason for writing to you, is that Members asked me to convey to you their concern at the lack of consultation between our authorities in connection with the recent planning decision to increase the number of take offs and landings at City Airport.

Clearly the two matters of flight paths and City Airport expansion have become related issues in so far as the impact on Redbridge is concerned and this has had anegative impact on residents of Redbridge. My Council does not believe that sufficient attention was given to the coupled effect of these changes on Redbridge in making a decision. Clearly, the impact of the proposal to increase the number of flights ought to have been considered in tandem with flight path changes.

Members believe that this information should have been sought and sent to Redbridge. Under the Town and Country Planning General Development Procedure Order 1995 the procedure for consultation between neighbouring authorities where land of a neighbouring authority is affected is for the deciding Local Planning Authority to send the application and related documents to the neighbouring planning authority. I understand that this procedure was not followed because Newham planning officers felt that the actual movement of flights beyond taking off and landing at the airport was beyond the scope of the planning application and a matter for NATS.

However, Members feel that the change in flight paths has had an adverse impact on Redbridge and this was relevant to the application for increased aircraft movements. Therefore, the full consultation process between planning authorities ought to have been followed with the provision of all relevant information.

Clearly, this Council would appreciate your views on what matters were taken into account in deciding the application and assurances that any further applications which could result in increased movements from City Airport over Redbridge is subject to the full consultation procedures between planning authorities.

Yours sincerely,

ROGER HAMPSON
CHIEF EXECUTIVE

This letter was provided by courtesy of Redbridge Council through a FOI request.

Sunday, February 07, 2010

Mayor's Question Time On London City Airport


Mayor answers to London

London City Airport

[Main question]

Question number0236/2010
Meeting date27/01/2010

Question by John Biggs

What, if any, work is the GLA, including functional bodies, doing on the environmental impact of London City Airport?

Answer by Boris Johnson

The environmental impacts of London City Airport are clearly an issue of concern for local people, highlighted during my recent public question time in Ilford.

The only environmental impact work I’m aware of that has been undertaken by the GLA and its functional bodies relates to potential noise impacts arising from the proposed expansion of the airport on the LDA’s nearby landholdings.

I am aware that the planning permission relating to the proposed expansion, which Newham determined, and which I have no powers of direction over, has been challenged. I understand Newham are awaiting a decision from the high court as to whether the current permission can proceed.

I support the view that the CAA should consult the residents of east London when undertaking the 12 month review required following the implementation of airspace design changes and the associated changes to flight paths affecting departures from London City airport.


London City Airport

Question by Murad Qureshi

Why did you not see fit to intervene on the expansion of City Airport?

Answer by Boris Johnson

I have no planning powers in respect of the airport’s ambition to expand its operations to 120,000 flights a year. However, after considering the economic and environmental information submitted with the planning application made by the airport to Newham Council in 2007 and clarifying any potential impact of the proposed expansion on the Thames Gateway Bridge, I decided that Newham Council was best placed to determine the application itself.