HEATHROW AIRPORT CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE
Minutes of the HACC Meeting held on 26th March 2014
at the Heathrow Academy
PRESENT:
Sam Jones, Chairman - HACC
Carole Havercroft, Secretary - HACC
Cllr. June Nelson (Deputy) - LB Hillingdon
Cllr. Alan Smith - London Councils
Cllr. David Linnette - LB Richmond on Thames
Cllr. Malcolm Beer (Deputy) - RB Windsor & Maidenhead
Cllr. Chris Turrell - Bracknell Forest BC
Cllr. Ruth Vigor-Hedderly - Bucks CC
Cllr. Steven Lambert (Deputy) - Bucks CC
Cllr. Marian Rough - Spelthorne BC
Cllr. Spencer Taylor - Spelthorne BC
Margaret Majumdar - EANAG
Virginia Godfrey - HACAN/Clearskies
Rob Gibson - LAANC
Iain Hope - LCCI
Susan Parsons - ABTA
David Joseph - BATA
Mark Gardiner - IATA
Andy Hull - Independent
Keith Harlow - Independent
Ian Ramsay - Independent
Kai Virtanen - Independent
Alison Partridge - Independent
OTHER
Colin Dunn (Deputy) - DfT
HEATHROW REPRESENTATIVES
Nigel Milton - Heathrow Director of Aviation Policy and
Political Relations
Cheryl Monk - Head of Community Relations & Policy
Theresa Gruber - Community Communications Manager
Rachel Thomas - Flight and Noise Adviser
Chloe Wittet - Press Officer
PRESENTERS
Philip Carlisle - HACC Adviser
Matt Gorman - Heathrow Sustainability Director
Jock Lowe - Heathrow Hub Proposal
Rob Gray - ‘Back Heathrow’ Campaign
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE:
1. Apologies for absence were received from the following:-
Normand Boivin (Heathrow), Tim May (DfT), Brian Yates (Consumers’ Association),
Cllr. Chris Summers & Cllr. Surinder Varma (LB Ealing), Cllr. James Swindlehurst
(Slough BC), Frank Wingate (West London Business), John Williams (GTMC),
Richard Taylor (Independent), James Stoddart (Independent).
4753 MINUTES AND ACTION PLAN SUMMARY OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING
1. Minutes and Action Plan Summary of the meeting held on 29th January 2014 were agreed as an accurate record with the following amendment:-.
Rachel Thomas and Cllr. Summers had referred to Minute 4740, point 3 to read as:-
Time Based Separation is a relatively large step change for the whole of the community.
NATS were in the process of writing a safety case on separation requirements which
will address all of those concerns. Currently, distance-based radar separation is
3 nautical miles, but sometimes wake vortex separation required 4 nautical miles.
4754 MATTERS ARISING
1. (a) Minute 4713 - c/f from 18th September 2013 meeting. Arrange a presentation
for a future HACC meeting in 2014 to share the lessons learnt from the
2013 pilot scheme on noise insulation (Nigel Milton).
1. This matter had been actioned. Please refer to Minute 4757.
(b) Minute 4705 - c/f from 18th September 2013 meeting. Investigate stats figure of 880 flights for August 2013 (out-of-alternation aircraft flying under TEAM) (Rick Norman). This matter would be further c/f.
1. This matter would be further c/f.
(c) Minute 4738 - draft final submission to the Airport Consultative Committee Guidelines Consultation. Circulate to members for final comment before submission to the DfT by 14th February 2014 (Philip Carlisle).
1. This matter had been actioned.
(d) Minute 4739 – members to advise Secretary if they wish to sit as a volunteer on the Working Group chaired by Two Tomorrows (ALL).
1. This matter had been actioned.
(e) Minute 4740 - provide list of dates and venues of public consultation exhibitions – 3rd runway (Nigel Milton).
1. This matter had been actioned.
(f) Minute 4740 - provide link to NATS Time Based Separation documents when
published (Nigel Milton).
1. This matter to be actioned. Awaiting publication.
(g) Minute 4741 - daft final response to the DfT Night Flying Restrictions
Consultation (Philip Carlisle).
1. This matter had been actioned.
(h) Minute 4749 - establish if night quota usage figure on tabled report includes
dispensed departures (Rachel Thomas).
1. This matter had been actioned. However, Margaret Majumdar, ACTION:
who had raised the question would re-submit this through the MARGARET
Secretary for further response. MAJUMDAR
4755 REPORT BY THE CHAIRMAN AND SECRETARIAT
1. There were no matters to discuss under this item.
4756 HEATHROW MANAGEMENT MATTERS
1. Heathrow Update and Statistical Information had been circulated with the Agenda
and was noted.
2. Nigel Milton, Heathrow Director of Aviation Policy and Political Relations outlined
the Heathrow Update report.
Traffic figures had improved in January and February 2014, with 5.4 million passengers passing through Heathrow in January, an increase of 3.8% on the previous year and 4.9 million passengers in February, an increase of 1% on the previous year.
Seats per aircraft had increased 1.4% in January and 1.6% in February 2014.
It had been announced that Avianca, the Colombian airline, would be flying into Heathrow later this year from Bogota, with a new four times a week route.
Columbia was one of the emerging economies that the airport had been hoping to
link in to.
The Air Passenger Duty changes in the Budget were applauded by the industry.
From Heathrow’s point of view, reducing the tax on the very long-haul flights
to a lower level was welcomed.
The Terminal 2 project was still on scheduled target for full operation on
4th June 2014.
Heathrow had been announcing further details of the retail offerings that would be
in the terminal based around the theme of the ‘Best of British’.
The trials had progressed well. Two trials had involved 1,000- 3,000 passengers.
These had been very helpful in identifying snags and also in confirming that many
of the new systems which had been set up in the terminal were correct.
The runway re-surfacing commenced on 23rd March 2014 on the northern runway.
Advertisements had been placed in the local papers and briefings made to local authorities to alert residents about the works.
Maintenance works had commenced on 17th March 2014 until 30th June 2014 to replace utility infrastructure under the Southern Perimeter Road. Part of the work
would involve the installation of a new cable duct which would require the closure
of one carriageway. To support the work, a major contraflow system would be introduced on the Eastbound carriageway reducing traffic to a single line in each
direction between Stirling Road and Seaford Road traffic lights.
A new ‘Viewing Heathrow’ platform at Terminal 4 is available for passengers.
It is the first of its kind at Heathrow since the old Terminal 2 viewing platform
was closed along with the building itself.
The Heathrow public consultation on the North-West runway proposal
closed on 16th March 2014. This was part of the preparation for the response
that the airport needs to submit to the Airports Commission. It would be a
refined version of the submission made last summer on the North-West
option, taking into account the views of local stakeholders.
Approximately 14,000 responses had been received which were now being analysed.
Heathrow would be publishing a final summary report on the findings from the
consultation. In ranking, the five most important issues of concern to residents
were noise, air quality, safety, local jobs and aircraft developments.
The areas of Wraysbury and Colnbrook, in particular, had also referred to the local flooding experienced at the time of the heavy rain earlier in the year.
The final submission to be made to the Airports Commission on 9th May 2014
would also be published.
The second Fly Quiet league table was published in February. It showed that
airlines did care about the perception of their performance, with a number of airlines
who had significantly improved their ratings.
3. Nigel Milton advised that Heathrow had received formal rejection by LB Hillingdon
to the Cranford Agreement planning application.
It had been the intention to undertake the Rapid Access Taxi works (RATS) during
the summer, at the same time as the re-surfacing work of the northern runway.
Unfortunately, due to the delay in receiving the notice of rejection from
LB Hillingdon and the fact that Heathrow would need to appeal the decision, it would not be possible to undertake the works as intended in the summer, nor would
an ending of the Cranford Agreement be seen this winter as Heathrow had hoped.
4. Ian Ramsay asked if LB Hillingdon had explained the reasons for their rejection.
Nigel Milton confirmed that five reasons were given, the main one being due to
the impact on Cranford Primary School in Hounslow, as there was an issue on the assessment of mitigation. Other reasons included air quality, noise insulation for Longford, metrics and disagreement with the overall policy.
5. Cllr. Rough referred to road access around the airport and local signage.
When discussing airport access, this tended to be looked on as a broader scale.
However, the use of local roads, particularly between Hounslow and Surrey on the
freight side of the airport should be considered.
Also, it should be taken on board the perception that HGVs only exit at the M25
under the remit of the Highways Agency, whereas they by-pass and come off at the
Surrey roads onto the A40. Some of the HGVs had a problem with SATNAV
and arrived at the wrong destination.
It was therefore suggested that if improved road signage was introduced it would
be helpful in overcoming the problem as would discussions with freight forwarders.
Nigel Milton agreed that an update on local road access would be provided at the
next meeting by Heathrow when the members could communicate their concerns.
ACTION:
NIGEL
MILTON
A significant part of the work to be undertaken by Heathrow, both as part
of the third runway plans and also improving the two-runway airport is to look
at local surface access to the airport.
6. Cllr. Taylor reported this issue had also been raised at a meeting of the Surrey
local Committee. They would like to encourage road signage to be improved,
which would greatly assist the Continental drivers.
4757 QUIETER HOMES INITIATIVE SCHEME
1. A presentation and update was made by Matt Gorman, Heathrow Sustainability
Director on the ‘Quieter Homes Initiative’ Scheme as (enclosed).
In terms of the long-term future for insulation, it still applied that if the Airports
Commission process was followed, studying the long-term future of Heathrow
amongst other airports, at this stage, improvements to noise insulation schemes
in 2014 would be re-addressed at the end of this year to consider the offer for 2015.
Once the Airports Commission recommendations were made, Heathrow would
review the schemes in their light.
If the Government supported expansion at Heathrow, it was recognised that a comprehensive package of measures of noise insulation would be needed to reduce
the noise impact.
2. Rob Gibson asked if Heathrow were disappointed at the low uptake of the scheme by residents, with only 135 households out of 2,300. Also, it was suggested that it might
be appropriate to roll the scheme forward by contacting landlords directly rather than
the tenants who may not wish to be involved if they do not own the property.
Matt Gorman responded that lessons had been learnt on the low percentage of the
total take-up. When 100% of the cost was offered, it was a much higher take-up of
the scheme. This gave a sense of the marketing, which could be improved by writing individual, named letters to property owners, setting out more clearly the benefits of
the scheme on offer, explaining the fact that Heathrow funded 100% of the cost
and the existence of an independent noise assessment process.
A number of households around the airport had already benefitted from either existing Heathrow schemes or had insulated their homes themselves.
As regards approaching social landlords directly, this was a good point to follow up.
3. Philip Carlisle asked if the positive reaction received by Anderson Acoustics from
135 households who took up the option were the only properties they visited or if
were they involved with the 320 households who had expressed interest.
Matt Gorman confirmed that all 320 households were visited in the process.
The independent noise assessment was carried out, following which a package
had been recommended and three quotes obtained from suppliers for the works.
4. Cllr. Linnette asked if the noise footprints were ‘set in stone’ as they were very
narrow and how often were they reviewed.
Matt Gorman explained that the noise footprints around the airport were measured
and published every year by the Government. There was an annual update process.
In terms of using them as a basis to determine whether a household was eligible for
a noise insulation scheme was a challenge as a boundary had to be defined.
5. Cllr. Vigor-Hedderly stated that, as the local ward member for Iver and Richings Park,
she was concerned to note the area did not qualify for any benefits on noise insulation
and asked the reason why and to understand the decision on noise mapping.
Pollution was incredibly high in Iver and noise was frequently complained about.
Did Heathrow take on board the number of complaints received from people who did not qualify for noise insulation and recommend that they should be.
Matt Gorman undertook to follow this up directly with Bucks CC as to how the
decision on allocation of noise insulation was determined. ACTION:
MATT
GORMAN
Heathrow followed a series of Government policies on noise insulation measured by
noise contours. This covered up to 40,000 homes in the vicinity of the airport,
except those affected by night noise, but extended a long way to the East and West.
The Government had recently published an Aviation Policy Framework and looked
at the question of measuring annoyance from noise and what the correct measure was.
Its view was that, on balance, although there was emerging evidence in this area that
the current system should be continued of average noise contours at a level of
57 decibels, the Airports Commission was looking at a range of different noise
measures.
To reiterate, as an airport looking ahead to any possible expansion, it was recognised
that the approach to noise insulation would need to be completely reviewed.
6. Andy Hull asked how the independent noise assessors measured the noise and how
they are able to visit at the noisiest time of the day or night to make the assessment.
Matt Gorman explained that one of the issues was the difference between easterly and westerly operations. One of the challenges last year was to time appointments to ensure the assessors were visiting homes to measure the noise when there were aircraft overhead.