This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Kent International Airport Review of Section 106 Agreement
Revised Report April 2005
1.1 1.1 Background to study .......................................................................... 1 Layout of report.................................................................................. 2
2. UK and EU Legislation
2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 Introduction....................................................................................... 3 The Aviation White Paper.................................................................. 3 Civil Aviation Act 1982 ...................................................................... 3 EU Directive 2002/30/EC .................................................................. 5 EU Directive 2002/49/EC .................................................................. 5 EC Directive 85/337 .......................................................................... 6 Planning Policy Guidance ................................................................. 6 Planning Policy Guidance Note 24: Planning and Noise ................... 7
3. Noise Monitoring and Reporting
3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9 3.10 Introduction ........................................................................................ 9 Noise units and measurement ........................................................... 9 Aircraft noise certification and classification ....................................... 9 Noise measurement at airports .........................................................10 Airport noise contours .......................................................................10 Noise monitoring systems.................................................................11 Arrival and departure flight paths.......................................................12 Radar tracking...................................................................................13 Noise reporting procedures ...............................................................13 Noise complaint procedures..............................................................13
4. Review of UK Airport Noise Policies
4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.8 4.9 4.10 4.11 4.12 4.13 4.14 4.15 4.16 4.17 Belfast City Airport ............................................................................15 Birmingham International Airport.......................................................15 Bournemouth International Airport ....................................................15 Bristol International Airport................................................................16 Cardiff International Airport ...............................................................16 Exeter International Airport................................................................17 Leeds Bradford International Airport..................................................17 Liverpool International Airport ...........................................................17 London City Airport ...........................................................................18 London Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted Airport ..............................18 London Luton Airport.........................................................................19 Manchester International Airport .......................................................20 Newcastle International Airport .........................................................20 Norwich International Airport .............................................................21 Nottingham East Midlands Airport.....................................................21 Southampton International Airport.....................................................22 Teeside International Airport .............................................................22
5. KIA – Future Development and Airport Business Needs
5.1 5.2 Future development of KIA................................................................23 Forecasted traffic growth and implications for aircraft noise ..............23
6. KIA - Existing Section 106 Agreement
6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6 6.7 6.8 6.9 6.10 6.11 6.12 6.13 6.14 6.15 6.16 6.17 6.18 6.19 6.20 6.21 6.22 6.23 Introduction .......................................................................................25 Second schedule - Night flying policy................................................25 General noise limitations...................................................................27 Dwelling insulation scheme...............................................................27 Preferred departure runway ..............................................................27 Noise abatement routes....................................................................28 Noise monitoring terminals................................................................28 Pollution monitoring...........................................................................29 Noise monitoring ...............................................................................29 Engine testing ...................................................................................29 Green travel strategy.........................................................................29 Environmental Statement ..................................................................30 Payments..........................................................................................30 Third parties......................................................................................31 Airport Master Plan ...........................................................................31 Enforcement .....................................................................................31 Second draft –Night flying policy .......................................................32 Purpose of night flying policy.............................................................32 Aircraft type.......................................................................................32 Landing direction and route...............................................................32 Monitoring and reporting ...................................................................32 Penalties ...........................................................................................33 Summary ..........................................................................................33
7. Review of Section 106 Agreements at other UK Airports
7.1 7.2 7.3 Birmingham International Airport........................................................29 London City Airport ............................................................................30 Manchester International Airport ........................................................31
Appendix A1: Appendix A2: Appendix B1: Appendix B2: Appendix B3: Appendix B4: Appendix B5: Current KIA Section 106 Agreement Main (Second) Schedule Planestation’s Proposals re: Night Flying Policy KIA 57-72 dBA Leq 16 hour contours – 1996 KIA 54-72 dBA Leq 16 hour contours - Summer 2000 KIA 54-72 dBA Leq 16 hour contours - Summer 2001 KIA 54-72 dBA Leq 16 hour contours Annual Period - 26/9/00 to 26/09/01 KIA 54-72 dBA Leq 16 hour contours - Summer 2005
Background to study
This report has been prepared by Alan Stratford and Associates Limited on behalf of Thanet District Council. It provides a review of the existing Section 106 Agreement between the Council and Planestation relating to the operation of Kent International Airport (KIA), together with supplementary analysis on noise control and other environmental issues at other UK airports. Where appropriate it compares proposals at KIA in relation to best practice examples from other UK airports. The current Section 106 Agreement was prepared in 2000 and was based on the existing operations at KIA, which were predominantly dedicated cargo and training flights. The S106 Agreement concentrates on establishing environmental control and management procedures relating to aircraft noise, night time flying, noise preferential routings, noise monitoring and reporting, engine testing, air pollution and surface access (green travel) strategy. In September 2004, a new low-cost airline, EUjet, commenced flying from KIA to a range of UK and European destinations, using a fleet of Fokker F100 aircraft. In December 2004, KIA handled some 780 air transport movements (ATMs), representing over a tenfold increase in comparison to December 2002 (71 ATMs). Air service timetabling has also resulted in a limited number of landings to be required during the early night time period, and controls for such activities are considered. EUjet are planning further expansion of their operations at KIA over the next few years. As a result of the change in the nature of operations, both Thanet District Council and the airport’s owner, Planestation, have agreed to renegotiate the Section 106 Agreement in the interests of both parties. This report is designed to provide background information to assist in this process. It should be noted that a Section 106 Agreement is usually initiated by an application for development, and sets the Obligations that accompany the Conditions of the Planning Permission. These Obligations set out the basis by which development will take place, be regulated and monitored, determine payment towards costs of infrastructure that is required because of development, and identify mitigation measures against adverse environmental impacts that need to be implemented. The current Kent International Airport/Thanet District Council S106 Agreement is unusual in that no specific development proposals initiated its preparation, rather it has resulted from a voluntary commitment between the two parties. The Report reviews and comments where felt necessary on the current Second Schedule and Draft Night Time Flying Policy under consideration. As a general point, a number of the issues raised are difficult to properly assess since it has not been possible to review, or establish the existence, of background studies by the Airport, such as any relating to Environmental Assessment, Surface Traffic Assessment, forecasts for the next 5 to 10 year period of expected air traffic growth, and the nature of this traffic.
Layout of report
This report is divided into seven sections. Following this introductory section, a review of current UK and EU legislation on environmental controls at airports is provided in Section 2. Section 3 gives an overview of aircraft noise monitoring systems and reporting, whilst Section 4 provides outline details of noise control policies and procedures at 19 major UK airports. Section 5 gives a brief assessment of Kent International Airport’s potential development and business needs, together with any environmental implications of future growth. Section 6 gives some preliminary comments on KIA’s existing Section 106 Agreement with Thanet District Council whilst Section 7 provides a review of other Section 106 Agreements in place at other UK airports. The information contained in this report is based on desk research supplemented in some cases with clarification from airport operators or local authorities. Whilst we have endeavoured to ensure that this information is both accurate and up-to-date, we cannot provide any guarantee that this is necessarily the case.
UK and EU Legislation
With the increasing awareness and importance of environmental issues, and in particular those concerning airport operation and development, legislative powers that influence the control and regulation of airports continue to grow nationally and internationally. It is intended to concentrate on certain key legal items, and also touch on others that have a bearing on the issues. Considerable further legislation exists relating to planning and airport development, in particular environmental assessment procedures and sustainability issues, but this initial review will concentrate on airport noise related matters. The resulting powers and levels of control lie with a range of authorities from the European Union, the UK national government, the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) as both regulator and a consultee, regional government and local government.
The Aviation White Paper
In December 2003 the Government published Cm 6046 The Future of Air Transport, a White Paper setting out a strategic framework for the development of airport capacity in the UK over the next 30 years, against the background of wider developments in air transport. The White Paper endorsed a balanced approach which recognised the importance of aviation to the national and regional economies, sought to reduce and minimise the impacts of airports on those who live nearby and on the natural environment, and would ensure that, over time, aviation paid its external costs. The White Paper emphasised the importance of making the best use of existing capacity both at the major London airports and at regional airports. Paragraph 3.12 addresses in particular the issues related to airport noise, especially those during the night period : ‘The Government recognises that noise from aircraft operations at night is widely regarded as the least acceptable aspect of airport operations. We will bear down on night noise accordingly, but we must strike a fair balance between local disturbance, the limits of social acceptability and the economic benefits of night flights. This should be done on a case by case basis.’
Civil Aviation Act 1982
The 1982 Act provides for the establishment of facilities for environmental management, the introduction and operation of mitigation measures such as noise insulation of property, and processes for consultation with the communities in the vicinity of an airport. Depending on the specific legal context within the Sections of the Act, an airport, or a group of airports, would be “designated” for regulation for particular activities. Differing lists of airports may be designated for noise management controls, formal consultation, aviation security, policing of airports, economic regulation or other matters.
EU00142:FINAL REPORT PAGE 3
In respect of noise mitigation measures, there are currently three airports designated under Section 80 of Civil Aviation Act 1982 for the purposes of Section 78 of that Act – Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted. Section 78 empowers the Secretary of State to regulate noise and vibration connected with aircraft taking off or landing at these “designated airports”. The origins of this arrangement date back to the 1960’s, when these airports were part of the national British Airports Authority, where at that time these provided the predominant proportion of air services from the entire UK. Development and management of noise monitoring and noise insulation compensation schemes were carried by the then Department of Transport, not the airports operator. The introduction of common arrangements introduced at the designated airports in the early 1990’s resulted in the same system of aircraft classification for aircraft at any of these airports, with restrictions on common rules, including the same hours of restrictions, and the same rules for dispensations, early arrivals and administration. The only difference is that movement and night quotas are set separately at each airport, to reflect specific market differences in the air services operated. At all other UK airports – “non-designated” in Section 78 and 80 noise legislation terms – the impact of noise can only be controlled by operational restrictions imposed by the planning system and the goodwill of the airport operators. The airline industry itself is protected from any legal action in respect of nuisance by virtue of the Air Navigation Order 1920. However, in practice, the control of noise at other airports has been achieved by means of the planning process. In particular, by using the custom and practice of procedures and standards at the Designated Airports as benchmarks to judge the value and effectiveness of operational controls, facilities and procedures aimed at mitigating environmental and noise impact. The standards and principles set for the Designated Airports, and Government actions to regulate these for environmental objectives, has set the framework for the introduction of comparable measures at other UK airports. The key issue for consideration is the need to examine any proposed measure derived from the examples at Designated Airports in context of that airport’s actual level of activity, existing or planned, and the commercial and investment resources that are realistically likely to be available to implement any measure. Licensed airports have the power, under Section 38 of the 1982 Act to fix their charges in relation to aircraft noise, or to the inconvenience resulting from such noise, including departures from compliance to noise routing requirements in the vicinity of the airport. Section 35 of the 1982 Act originally set up formal Consultative Committees for Heathrow and Gatwick. Many other airports subsequently set up consultative committees to parallel the requirements of Section 35 of the Act, although only those airports actually designated by the Secretary of State for Transport are obliged to provide such facilities. With the number of other airports that operated Committees of some form on a “goodwill basis”, revisions to the process were made in 1987. The DfT Guidance Note for
EU00142:FINAL REPORT PAGE 4
Airport Consultative Committees of December 2003 introduced the present arrangements, where Manston is Designated in the schedule in SI 2002/2421, and required to establish a formal Consultative Committee. Ultimately, a Committee has only power to advise airport management and make recommendations.
EU Directive 2002/30/EC
Directive 2002/30/EC reflects the “balanced approach” to aircraft noise management recommended in 2001 in Resolution R33-7 of the 33rd Assembly of the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO). It established new rules and procedures with regard to the introduction of noise related operating instructions at major airports. The Directive has been incorporated in UK legislation by The Aerodromes (Noise Restrictions) (Rules and Procedures) Regulations 2003.These rules and procedures apply to certain aspects affecting the operation of aircraft according to a period of time, such as at night. The UK has the necessary arrangements to give effect to the Directive in UK legislation. The Secretary of State for Transport retains responsibility for noise issues at the three Designated Airports as the “competent authority under Article 3 of the Directive. At all other airports covered the airport operator is the competent authority, and is responsible for setting out the environmental noise objectives for the airport, and for following the rules for the assessment of measures to achieve these objectives. The UK Regulations emphasise the need for the promotion of airport capacity in harmony with the environment, facilitating noise abatement procedures, achieving maximum environmental benefit in the most cost effective manner, limiting or reducing the number of people significantly affected by aircraft noise. Annex II of the Directive sets out a description of the information needed to be considered in making decisions on operating restrictions. These include existing noise mitigation methods, forecasts of future noise climate without further mitigation measures, and an assessment of the effects and costs of additional measures that could be taken to improve the noise climate. The assessment of noise is also linked to a noise mapping process established by the European Directive on Assessment and Management of Environmental Noise.
EU Directive 2002/49/EC
This Directive covers noise from all of transport modes, including major roads, railways and airports, together with industry and significant population centres. Published in 2002 the Directive is presently being transposed by the Government into UK law. The Directive seeks to harmonise measurement and assessment of noise, principally by requiring a programme of strategic noise maps. Also required are Action Plans, based on the noise maps, to manage noise issues and effects at the mapped locations. Fundamental to the preparation of the noise maps is early and effective opportunities for public participation, with a first round of plans due by 2008.
Directive 2002/49/EC does not introduce noise limit values, but intends that the action plans should address, in particular, areas where noise exposure is considered harmful to health, and to preserve environmental noise quality where it is good. The Government is currently developing a separate National Ambient Noise Strategy for England which will build on the requirements of the Directive. In its review of current night restrictions at Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted the Department for Transport reflects the requirements of Directive 2002/49/EC, where changes to some of the evaluation criteria and standards differ from those currently used in the production of information, for example noise contours. It is therefore likely that some of current practice and measurement criteria will need review after completion of the DfT evaluations, altering standards and interpretation of effects at the Designated Airports. By implication, therefore, such revised standards and criteria are likely to be reflected in the procedures and criteria adopted as industry “best practice” by the remaining non-designated UK airports, in a way appropriate to the scale of current and planned air transport activity at an airport.
EC Directive 85/337
EC Directive 85/337 requires Environmental Assessment (EA) for certain types of project to be carried out before planning permission is granted. It has been implemented for projects that require planning permission by the Town and Country Planning (Assessment of Environmental Effects) Regulations 1988. For a limited number of projects listed in Schedule 1 to the Regulations, such as major aerodromes, EA is required in every case. For a wider range of projects listed in Schedule 2 to the Regulations, including local roads, other new aerodromes, industrial estate development, disposal of non-toxic waste and mineral extraction, EA is required if the proposal is likely to have significant environmental effects. Where EA is required, the likely effects of noise will be one of the considerations to be dealt with in the environmental statement prepared by the developer and submitted to the local planning authority with the planning application.
Planning Policy Guidance
Planning Policy Guidance Notes (PPGs) set out Government policies on different aspects of landuse planning. Local authorities must take their content into account when preparing development plans and determining planning applications. The PPGs also assist developers an indication of the factors to take into account when preparing proposals for development. Landuse policy around airports, and under the principal arrival and departure route tracks, is an important factor in helping minimise adverse impacts of aviation, particularly aircraft noise. Whilst a local authority may take a close interest in air navigation arrangements likely to be associated with any airport planning proposal,
EU00142:FINAL REPORT PAGE 6
seeking advice from the air traffic service provider and the CAA, it cannot make a planning condition that has a direct effect on these arrangements. The CAA Safety Regulation Group may comment, and make recommendations, if necessary, in respect of the effects of proposed development on or in the vicinity of an airport that could conflict with runway safeguarding and obstacle clearance criteria.
Planning Policy Guidance Note 24 : Planning and Noise
It is not intended to address all PPGs which could influence airport development and operation, but discussion is justified in respect of PPG 24. Issued in 1994, PPG 24 replaced earlier guidance given in DoE Circular 10/73. It gives advice to local planning authorities in England on the use of their planning powers to minimise the adverse impacts of noise, from all modes of transport and from heavy industry. PPG 24 sets out the considerations to be taken into account in determining applications for noise sensitive developments, such as homes, schools and hospitals, and also for those activities that will generate noise. It specifies noise exposure categories for residential development and recommends appropriate levels of exposure to different sources of noise, drawing on guidance from the World Health Organisation (WHO) and other sources.
PPG 24 Annex 1 – Recommended Noise Exposure Categories For New Dwellings Near Existing Noise Sources
Air Traffic - Summary of recommended Noise Exposure Categories (NECs) Time NEC NEC NEC NEC A B C D 0700-2300 <57 57-66 66-72 >72 2300-0700 <48 48-57 57-66 >66 Classification A B C D Noise level may not be desirable at upper level of category, but should not be a determining factor in granting permission Noise should be taken into account and conditions imposed where appropriate Permission should not normally be refused. If permission is permitted, conditions should be imposed to protect against noise Planning permission should normally be refused
Notes : • LAeq level : relates to a cumulative 16 hour daytime or 8 hour night time noise contour for a “busy period” of airport activity • Night Time Noise Levels : where individual events regularly exceed 82.5 dB LAmax several times in every hour sites should be treated as NEC C regardless of LAeq-8hr (except where the LAeq-8hr already puts the site in NEC D) • Aircraft Noise : daytime values accord with the contour values adopted by DfT which relate to levels measured 1.2m above open ground
PPGs are guidance not law, but will indicate the likely stance to be taken by the Secretary of State in any given case, and be taken into account by an
EU00142:FINAL REPORT PAGE 7
appellate Court in deciding what is reasonable. It is vital that the local planning authority follows such guidance in considering noise sensitive development in the vicinity of an airport. There are instances across the UK where such advice has not be followed resulting in new development taking place in an inappropriate location in noise terms, or without the requirement for mitigation measures being a condition of development.
Noise Monitoring and Reporting
Noise is generally considered the major environmental impact in terms of pollution issues arising from the operation of an airport and its effects on external communities in the vicinity of an airport. As discussed in Section 6 other aspects, such as air quality and surface water pollution, also are important items that require systematic monitoring as airport activity grows. The physics of noise measurement in the context of airports is an established area, where in the past 35 years both the scientific and social effects have been well investigated and are understood. The state of the art in technical standards and equipment has been established to monitor and measure noise impact, which take into account many of the characteristics of the human ear. Some fundamental matters related to noise measurement will be addressed, and then the application of these to the monitoring of aviation activity will be reviewed.
Noise units and measurement
Measuring the sound pressure level created by an aircraft movement is not sufficient to characterise the degree of annoyance caused. In the case of airport noise measurements of loudness undergo further calibration intended to capture the sensitivity of the human ear, leading to what is called the AScale Adjustment. Thus the A Weighted decibel units are denoted as dBA. The decibel noise unit is logarithmic, so that a change of 10dBA equates to a halving or doubling of the perceived noise. In addition, a difference of 3dBA is needed before a difference in two noise levels can be perceived. The logarithmic nature of noise means than simple arithmetic averaging is not possible, with such calculations being more complex.
Aircraft noise certification and classification
In the late 1960’s the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) and a number of national civil aviation bodies began the process of adopting noise standards for transport aircraft. In 1976 ICAO and the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) specified very similar standards that civil transport aircraft had to meet. These were set out in the ICAO Convention Annex 16 – Environmental Protection : Aircraft Noise and in the FAA Federal Air Regulation 36 (FAR 36). Annex 16 sets out a series of standards of ranges of measured noise in technical Chapters, the noisiest being early generation jets – Chapter 1 (FAR36 Stage 1), second generation turbofans – Chapter 2/Stage 2 -, and the current high ratio fan engine aircraft – Chapter 3/Stage 3. The ICAO/FAA standards set specific performance criteria for the standardised measurement of aircraft types, relating to different aircraft models and variants, different engine fits and also different Maximum Take Off Weights (MTOW) for otherwise identical aircraft. The standard certification noise process measures noise at takeoff and landing on both the landing and approach paths and in addition to the side where takeoff noise was greatest.
EU00142:FINAL REPORT PAGE 9
Each aircraft type and subtype has therefore a recognised and formally certified noise profile, which can be used in establishing noise monitoring procedure, and in modelling forecast noise in the future from forecast aircraft movement schedules. For certification purposes the noise measurement used is the Effective Perceived Noise Level measured in ENPdB which is analogous to dBA. Chapter 1 aircraft disappeared from the fleets of world airlines in the 1970’s and 80’s, and in the US, Europe and most developed countries Chapter 2 aircraft were phased out by 2003, leaving only the much quieter Chapter 3 aircraft operating in these countries. In certain parts of the world such as Eastern Europe, Africa, South America and China some earlier Chapter 2 aircraft are still used. The Annex 16 Chapter criteria represent a range of aircraft noise, so that the perceived difference between the quietest Chapter 2 and the loudest Chapter 3 aircraft can be small. With continuing advances in aircraft engine technology the international bodies are currently in the early stage of identifying whether, and when, a future Chapter 4 Standard can be practically introduced.
Noise measurement at airports
The most commonly used measures of aircraft noise at airports are subdivided between : • • Single Event Measures associated with a single aircraft movement Cumulative Measures which seek to represent over time the cumulative effects of many movements over a specified period. The calculation of these involves the accumulation of the magnitude of each individual noise event due to a takeoff or landing, and the total number of such events in the measurement period. In the UK the daytime cumulative measure is generally taken over a 16 hour day (07.00 to 23.00 hours) and is expressed as the LAeq(16hour) in dBA. The cumulative measure represents the “average noise level” over the period, but in this form cannot differentiate between, say, a single very intensive and disturbing noise event and numerous moderate noise levels occurring during the same measurement period.
Airport noise contours
Noise contours are a measure of average noise exposure represented on the ground as a series of lines of equal exposure. The cumulative LAeq is used as a basis for the calculation of noise contours in the vicinity of an airport, and can be calculated based on schedules and noise readings experienced over a defined period, giving an historical noise contour. Alternatively noise contours for future years, based on an airport’s development plans and traffic forecasts can be calculated using a combination of forecast schedules by expected aircraft type and each individual aircraft noise characteristics from the formal noise certification process. A number of specialist programs to produce contours are available from noise advisers. In calculating the contour for, say, a particular year it is normal practice to model the peak summer period of airport operations, the resulting contour thus
EU00142:FINAL REPORT PAGE 10
representing the “worst case” situation. Noise contours are generated for a series of LAeq values in 3 to 5dBA steps, allowing certain threshold LAeq levels to be used to indicate, for example, areas of eligibility for noise insulation or identify the number of people exposed to aircraft noise. Comparisons between the same LAeq level contour between different years will indicate whether the noise disturbance has grown over time or, as has been the case in the past decade, that the contours have reduced in area inspite of increased flight activity due to the withdrawal of noisier aircraft and their replacement by the much quieter Chapter 3 aircraft. In the UK it is not uncommon to use the services of the Environmental Research and Consultancy Department (ERCD) of the UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) with its Aircraft Noise Contour Model (ANCON). This model is used by the Department for Transport in respect of its duties related to the three airports “designated” in noise terms (Heathrow, Gatwick, Stansted). The use of the CAA ANCON elsewhere at other UK non-designated airports therefore represents a standardised, established, basis for noise contour production and interpretation on a national basis.
Noise monitoring systems
Noise monitoring has become a virtual requirement for airports in developed countries as a prerequisite for developing noise mitigation strategies, for both the short term and the long term. In the 1970’s only a few airports had noise monitoring systems, whereas by the late 1990’s a large proportion of commercial airports had installed such systems. Over the same period the level of performance and technical sophistication of the noise monitoring systems improved dramatically. In consequence, the overall cost of the installation, operation and management of these systems has also increased considerably. Therefore the requirement to provide a system at an airport must be tempered by a thorough evaluation of its likely utility and application at the level of airport activity currently being experienced, combined with clear proposals for future enhancement and added sophistication as the activity of an airport might grow. The essential features of a modern noise monitoring system are a series of remote sensors/microphones – Noise Monitoring Terminals (NMTs) - located strategically around an airport, with emphasis on positions under flight paths or in the vicinity of residential or other noise sensitive areas. These sensors collect and transmit data on individual noise events to a central computing and reporting system. Such systems can also be specified to receive air traffic movement data, enabling individual aircraft to be identified with the recorded noise events. In the more comprehensive systems, air traffic radar data from the Secondary Surveillance Radar (SSR) serving the airport can be fed into the monitoring system to give positive aircraft identity, speed, altitude and physical location above the ground. This information can then allow a visual, three dimensional, image of the exact aircraft behaviour relative to a ground map of the airport vicinity. In realtime, an immediate comparison against noise and flight path regulations relating to taking off or landing at the airport becomes
EU00142:FINAL REPORT PAGE 11
possible. Historic stored data will also allow any subsequent noise complaint to be fully assessed, as necessary. The level of sophistication of some Airport Noise Monitoring Systems (ANOMS) available can include the ability to produce continuously available noise contours, if required by the nature of the monitoring circumstances. However, in normal circumstances noise contour production on an annual or seasonal basis is adequate, and the contours are more efficiently obtained as a specific and separate task by specialist contractors. The introduction of a monitoring system involves considerable capital, even for the most basic arrangements, covering not only the cost of the system itself, but the also the purchase of sites off airport to house the NMT sensors, high quality communication links from the NMTs to the central computer. There are also revenue costs related to system management training, and the recurring maintenance and calibration tasks once the system is installed. Equally essential to any of these systems are staff resources dedicated to its operation, and to administrate any resulting reporting and complaints processes introduced.
Arrival and departure flight paths
Departure routes flown by aircraft departing or arriving at an airport are dependent on other air traffic routes above or adjacent to the airport, location of sensitive landuses such as housing, and the performance capabilities of the aircraft in terms of rate of climb or rate of turn. For departing aircraft it may be possible to develop takeoff routings which turn aircraft away from sensitive areas, with these routes becoming the published standard for the airport, the Standard Instrument Departure routes (SID) The SID(s) would pass over the least populated areas wherever practical, to become the Noise Preferential Route(s) (NPR). An NPR is a corridor some 3km wide (1.5km either side of the SID). In respect of aircraft landing the same principles can apply but the nature of the “funnelling” of the aircraft onto the runway on the final stages of descent limits routeing possibilities. It must be emphasised that control of an aircraft’s adherence to an NPR is limited since at an altitude of between 3,000 to 7,000ft the main CAA National Air Traffic Service (NATS) take over control of the aircraft. The NATS recognises environmental objectives as part of its exercise of air navigation functions, and assists in establishing NPRs where possible in conjunction with an airport. Before an NPR can be established or modified NATS procedures include the requirement to carry out a full safety case evaluation. In addition a formal public consultation process is necessary for changes to air routeings below 7,000ft altitude, and when proposed changes would have a significant effect on the level and distribution of noise in the vicinity of an airport or the shape of its existing noise contours. Deviation from the NPR can occur for a variety of reasons such as the need to maintain safety separation from other aircraft, adverse weather conditions, or airways congestion near to navigational beacons, rather than simply error by the aircraft. A resulting Non Standard Departure (NSD) may be directed by
the Air Traffic Controllers both before or during takeoff, and should be recorded.
To accurately establish and record the aircraft track over the ground, and adherence to SID and NPR procedure, requires an Airport Monitoring System that includes a radar input from the SSR serving the airport. This input would be incorporated into the second phase Noise Monitoring System discussed above. Historic data can be overlaid to ground maps to demonstrate the extent of flight paths into and from the airport, and highlight deviations from normal rules of procedure.
Noise reporting procedures
Modern Noise Monitoring systems are able to collect considerable data from which standardised reports can be drawn to inform the airport operator, the airport Consultative Committee, the responsible Local Authority and affected communities on a regular basis as required. Historic trends can be established and examined against performance targets agreed between the airport and other parties, and should be publicly available on demand. Such information should form an element of an overall monitoring process of all aspects of the airports environmental management activities that may be recognised by the local authority or other organisations. An annual review and summary of these activities should be published by the local authority, together with an assessment of the airports performance in relation to any planning conditions or obligations formally agreed. These activities require the commitment of competent resources to monitor compliance with such obligations, not only within the management structure of the airport but also by the local authority in an “audit” role. In view of the expense of such duties, it is the practice at a number of UK airports that a contribution to the cost of the local authority employing a dedicated member of staff, or the services of an independent specialist consultant, who would have specific responsibilities for liaison, monitoring and reporting the performance of the airport to the council and to the public.
Noise complaint procedures
It is important that the airport establishes an open and clearly accessible noise complaints process. Complaints can be received directly by letter, telephone, email and individual visits to the airport, as well as through feedback from the local authority, community groups, Consultative Committee, individuals or the media. Phone, email and website contact details need to be published widely identifying the responsible manager at the airport, together with guidance to the complainant on the complaints procedure. Targets for a response by the airport should be established and monitored by the local authority and the Consultative Committee. If out of hours complaints are made – in relation to night flights for example – a dedicated contact line to a recording device should be provided, and the procedures for followup and subsequent action
EU00142:FINAL REPORT PAGE 13
must be in place and clearly publicised. Regular reporting of the nature, scale and action taken in response to complaints received must be a fundamental element of overall reporting procedure. The 2003 DfT Guidelines for Airport Consultative Committees formally encourage monitoring and reporting practices as outlined above. In addition the Environmental Information Regulations 2004, which came into force on 01 January 2005, require “public bodies” to make “environmental information” available to persons requesting it. Although early days for this new legislation and its possible interpretation in practice, it is a further incentive to make available, on a consistent and regular basis, the necessary environmental and operational information to keep both the Council and the public properly informed of the Airport’s activities.
Review of UK Airport Noise Policies
Belfast City Airport
Belfast City Airport is set in dockside Belfast adjacent to urban and industrial areas and residential development close to the north end of the runway. In 2004, the airport handled 2.1m passengers and 33,400 air transport movements (ATMs). Belfast City Airport’s noise management strategy revolves around a Section 106 Agreement and Operational Noise Abatement Procedures. The result is a composite set of restrictions which currently include: • • • • • • Limitation on airport operating hours (0630-2130) ATM movements cap (45,000 per annum) Restriction on the number of seats for sale on flights from the airport (1,500,000 per annum) Noise abatement routings Installation of Fixed Ground Power Units on all 10 aircraft stands in front of the terminal Commissioning of an independent Community Survey to evaluate residents’ attitudes towards aircraft noise
Birmingham International Airport
Birmingham International Airport is situated eight miles from central Birmingham, with dense urban housing on three sides close to its boundary, and green belt with major roads on the western side. In 2004, the airport handled 8.8m passengers and 109,200 air transport movements (ATMs). Birmingham Airport has six major policy areas in respect of aircraft noise. These include: • Operation of an airport noise and operations monitoring system (ANOMS), with a capability of tracking aircraft up to a 12 mile radius from the airport. In addition a community and environmental management tool, AIRVON, allows additional analyses such as population and housing analysis for noise contours and noise preferential routes Full noise complaints handling procedure is in place, which provides a detailed response to all complainants. Night flying policy (with an annual Quota Count) Noise preferential routes, with penalties for infringement Ground engine running restrictions Noise insulation scheme
• • • • •
Bournemouth International Airport
Bournemouth International Airport is six miles north east of Bournemouth and is situated in semi rural location. In 2004, the airport handled 0.5 million passengers and 9,600 air transport movements (ATMs).
EU00142:FINAL REPORT PAGE 15
Bournemouth has no formal policy in place, but implements certain measures in order to achieve their aim of being a ‘good neighbour’. These measures are: • • • • • Noise preferential routings (but no monitoring or penalty system) Minimum circuit height of 1500 ft Preferential runways for departures and arrivals Engine ground running restricted to certain time periods Provision of a dedicated noise complaints line. All calls are investigated and a response is provided. A statistical summary is prepared for all telephone and written complaints, which is presented to the Airport Consultative Committee
Bristol International Airport
Bournemouth International Airport is nine miles south west of Bristol and is set in semi rural location. In 2004, the airport handled 4.6m passengers and 54,800 air transport movements (ATMs). Bristol Airport has no formal noise policy, but has recently undertaken a major consultation exercise with local residents, businesses and other organisations to agree a series of noise control measures with North Somerset Council. These are as follows: • • • Development of Noise Preferential Routes, in conjunction with local Parish Councils Night-time flying restrictions Operation of an aircraft noise quota system, based on those used at London Heathrow and Gatwick. The quota applies between 2330-0600. Aircraft with a quota count of 4 or above are not normally allowed to take-off or land between 2300-0600
Cardiff International Airport
Cardiff International Airport is 13 miles south west of Cardiff and is situated in semi rural location. In 2004, the airport handled 1.9 million passengers and 22,000 air transport movements (ATMs). In common with other UK regional airport, Cardiff International Airport has instigated a number of noise control measures. These are: • • • • Operation of Noise Preferential Routes (Departures only) Preparation of noise contours (for a typical summer weekday, summer weekend, winter weekday and winter weekend) Request that pilots use reverse thrust to a minimum, particularly after 2130 hours, consistent with operational needs Restriction on ground running of engines between 2130-0700
Exeter International Airport
Exeter International Airport is six miles north east of Exeter and is in semi rural location. In 2004, the airport handled 0.6m passengers and 111,800 air transport movements (ATMs). Exeter Airport has a formal policy statement on a range of environmental issues including aircraft noise. Noise control measures adopted include: • • Noise preferential routings (although these are less precisely defined in comparison to other UK airports) Noise complaints concerning known or suspected known civil aircraft to be referred to the Airport Director
Leeds Bradford International Airport
Leeds Bradford International Airport is nine miles north west of Leeds and is surrounded by some suburban development on its south side with semi rural land to north. In 2004, the airport handled 2.4m passengers and 31,500 air transport movements (ATMs). Leeds Bradford Airport has a stated policy to ‘be a considerate neighbour and minimise as far as possible the effects and disturbance of noise from aircraft and airport operations. The noise control measures in place include: • • Noise preferential routings and procedures applying to all aircraft with a MTOW greater than 5,700 kgs Target daytime noise levels: • Take-off - No greater than 92 db(A) by day or 84 db(A) by night • Approach - No greater than 85 db(A) by day or 79 db(A) by night Operating quota – No departures in the night-time period (23000700) shall take place by aircraft with a quota count of 1,2,4,8 or 16. No landings shall take place with a quota count of 2,4,8, or 16. APU operating restrictions between 2300-0600 Continuous operation of a Lochard Noise Monitoring and Trackkeeping system with four permanent noise monitors
Liverpool International Airport
Liverpool International Airport is nine miles south east of Liverpool surrounded by dense urban residential and industrial areas to the north and river estuary to the south. In 2004, the airport handled 3.4m passengers and 39,700 air transport movements (ATMs). Liverpool Airport’s noise control measures include: • • Use of preferential runways for take-off and landing Operation of a noise quota system with the following restrictions • 2300-2330 - Aircraft with quota count of QC/8 or QC/16 must not be scheduled to take-off or land
• 2330-0600 - Aircraft with quota count of QC/8 or QC/16 must not take off or land • 0600-0700 - Aircraft with a quota count of QC/16 must not take off or be scheduled to land Certain exemptions apply Noise monitoring and track-keeping system in place with two fixed and one mobile terminals
London City Airport
London City Airport is eight miles east of the City of London, on a small dockland site surrounded by dense urban housing, university accommodation, an exhibition centre and commercial property. In 2004, the airport handled 1.7m passengers and 53,200 air transport movements (ATMs). Due to its city centre location, London City Airport has the most stringent operational and noise contraints out of all UK airports. The following noise measures are currently in place: • • Noise abatement procedures apply on departure and arrival Airport opening hours are as follows: • Weekdays - 0630-2200 • Saturdays - 0630-1230 • Sunday - 1230-2200 • Bank Holidays - 0900-2200 Limitation on ATMs (restricted to 240 per weekday and 140 on Saturdays and Sundays) Limitation on factored ATM movements, based on the aircraft noise category (ranging from Category A equivalent to 1.26 ATMs to Category E equal to 0.08 ATMs). The overall annual factored ATMs should not exceed 15% of the permitted number of ATMs in any one week or 73,000 per calendar year The maximum permitted aircraft noise level is Category A (91.694.5 PNdB). In addition, all aircraft must be capable of making an approach at 5.5 degrees or steeper in comparison to the normal approach of 3 degrees at most other airports A noise surcharge may be imposed for aircraft exceeding the noise limits A noise monitoring system is in place with four monitoring points
London Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted Airport
London Heathrow is 16 miles west of central London surrounded by dense
urban residential and commercial areas close to much of its boundary, with reservoirs and green belt on its western edge. In 2004, the airport handled 67.1 million passengers and 469,800 air transport movements (ATMs). London Gatwick is four miles to the north west of Crawley, adjacent to suburban residential, commercial and industrial areas on two sides with some semi rural areas on its western side. In 2004, the airport handled 31.4m passengers and 241,200 air transport movements (ATMs).
EU00142:FINAL REPORT PAGE 18
London Stansted is four miles to the north east of Bishops Stortford in semi rural location with major urban areas to the west and large towns on its eastern side. In 2004, the airport handled 20.9 million passengers and 176,800 air transport movements (ATMs). The noise control measures in place at London Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted Airports are complex and are currently under Government review. These currently include: • • Noise abatement procedures apply at all three airports Preferred runway operations (eg the Cranford Agreement at London Heathrow precluding departures from 09L except in exceptional circumstances) Operation of a noise quota system (QC/0.5 – QC/16), with night time flying restrictions on QC/8 and QC/16 aircraft Limitation on the total quota count in both the Winter and Summer seasons Restrictions on APU and engine ground running Operation of noise monitoring and track-keeping systems at all three airports (Heathrow – 10 terminals, Gatwick – 5 terminals and Stansted – 8 terminals)
• • • •
The Government review relates to the night flying restrictions to be applied for a six year period from Autumn 2005. Of particular concern is the number of flights permitted at Heathrow between 0430-0600 (currently an average of 16 arrival aircraft) and the noise classification of particular aircraft and engine types.
London Luton Airport
London Luton Airport is two miles east of Luton with major urban residential areas to the west, major industrial and commercial development on its south side, and green belt rural areas immediately to the north and east. In 2004, the airport handled 7.5m passengers and 64,200 air transport movements (ATMs). Luton Airport’s noise control measures include: • • • Noise Preferential Routing and Procedures as published in the AIP Certain ground engine running restrictions Noise charges apply for all departing and arrivals aircraft, calculated as a proportion of the landing fee. An additional nighttime noise supplement is also imposed. Noise surcharges apply to aircraft exceeding 94 dBA (day) and 81 dBA (night) A noise monitoring system is in place with three terminals sited 6500 metres from runway start of roll
Manchester International Airport
Manchester International Airport is 12 miles south west of Manchester city centre, with suburban residential, commercial and industrial areas to the north
EU00142:FINAL REPORT PAGE 19
and east and greenbelt rural areas to the immediate west and to the south. In 2004, the airport handled 21.0m passengers and 208,500 air transport movements (ATMs). Manchester Airport’s noise control measures are broadly similar to those at London Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted. An overall night-time noise limit is imposed whereby the size of the 60 LAeq night-time (2300-0700) contour should not exceed that measured in 1992/3. The current noise control measures include: • • An overall limit on night movements (capped at no more than 7% of total movements Noise quota for night movements (based on a similar QC system to London Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted Airports). Restrictions apply to QC/8 and QC/16 aircraft at night. The total QC noise budget for 2005 is fixed at 8,750 for the Summer and 3,900 for the Winter season An additional constraint on total night-time movements in the Summer and Winter season applies A noise monitoring and track-keeping system (MANTIS) is in place. This receives radar and flight plans from the Manchester Airport Management Operational Support System (AMOSS). The system monitors all aircraft within 30 km of the airport and automatically registers breach of the noise limits and identifies aircraft that stray by more than 1.5 km from the Preferred Noise Routes Financial penalties apply to departing aircraft exceeding 85 dB(A) between 2300-0700 and 92 dB(A) between 0700-2300
Newcastle International Airport
Newcastle International Airport is seven miles north west of Newcastle with suburban residential area to the west and semi rural location on its other boundaries. In 2004, the airport handled 4.7m passengers and 49,900 air transport movements (ATMs). Newcastle Airport has less stringent noise controls than several other UK airports, but it is currently reviewing its noise policy. Controls and procedures in place include: • • • Operation of Noise Preferential Routings (as listed in the AIP) Restrictions on APU and ground engine running A noise monitoring system is in place – but no financial penalties are imposed for infringement of the NPRs
Norwich International Airport
Norwich International Airport is situated four miles north of Norwich city centre, with suburban development on the south side and rural areas to the north. In 2004, the airport handled 0.4 million passengers and 7,000 air transport movements (ATMs).
Norwich Airport is presently reviewing its noise policy. include: • • • •
An airport curfew applies between 2300-0600 A surcharge of five times the landing fee is imposed on aircraft arriving outside normal operating hours Ground engine running is prohibited between 2300-0600 except with prior permission from an Airport Director A noise monitoring system (Cirrus Research - RASP 2 noise recording program) is in operation – but no financial penalties are imposed for noise or track-keeping infringement
Nottingham East Midlands Airport
Nottingham East Midlands Airport is 11 miles south of Derby, and is set in a semi rural location with urban areas to the east and some villages to other sides of site. In 2004, the airport handled 4.4m passengers and 55,900 air transport movements (ATMs). Noise management procedures in place at Nottingham East Midlands Airport include: • • • • Implementation of a maximum noise level limit (and penalty system) for night-time departures Introduction of a noise and radar track monitoring system (at a cost of £150,000) Provision of a noise insulation scheme (some 2000 properties have been insulated to date) Provision of annual noise contours Commitment that the size of the Airport’s night-time noise contour should not exceed that in 1996
Southampton International Airport
Southampton International Airport is five miles to the north east of Southampton and is in a semi rural location with suburban residential areas to the south and commercial development on a major road close to southern runway end. In 2004, the airport handled 1.5m passengers and 37,200 air transport movements (ATMs). Southampton Airport’s noise control measures include: • • • Noise Preferential Routings, applicable to all aircraft with an MTOW of 5,700 kg or greater Night-time movements restricted to a maximum of 10 per month or not more than 100 in any 12 month period Strict restrictions apply to engine ground running in accordance with a Section 106 Agreement signed with Eastleigh Borough Council. Approval for all engine ground running must be given by the Airport Duty Manager and is subject to a limit of 3 hours per week for all aircraft with a MTOW in excess of 15 tonnes.
Teeside International Airport
Teeside International Airport is six miles to the south east of Darlington and is set in a semi rural location. In 2004, the airport handled 0.8m passengers and 10,400 air transport movements (ATMs). A relatively low number of local residents are affected by aircraft noise at Teeside Airport. Current noise control measures in place at the airport include: • • • • Departure procedures to minimise noise disturbance Use of a preferred runway (23) at night Restrictions on training flights (eg circuit height) Restrictions on engine ground running between 2300-0700
KIA – Future Development and Airport Business Needs
Future development of KIA
KIA initially developed as a specialist freight airport, although the airport handled some specialist passenger charters, predominantly to the Former Yugoslavia during the 1960s and 1970s. Specialist dedicated freighter operations continue, although its main based airline, MK Airlines, moved to a new base at Ostend in Belgium in August 2004. There are still some ad-hoc freighter flights, mainly emergency relief and aircraft visiting the specialist maintenance centre, Jet Support. KIA’s owner, Planestation, have however, stated that they intend to find another home-based freighter operator to replace MK Airlines. Although KIA have attempted to attract passenger flights over the past five years, until August 2004, this was mainly restricted to the occasional charter for cruise liners sailing from Dover. In August 2004, however, a new low-cost airline, EUjet, started operating from KIA to some 19 UK and European destinations using Fokker F100 aircraft. Planestation subsequently acquired a 60 percent shareholding in EUjet. Unlike other low-cost airlines (with the exception of Flybe), EUjet do not utilise aircraft within the 140-180 seat range (eg B737/A319/A320), but instead deploy a fleet of Fokker F100 aircraft. These have a more limited range, seating capacity and cruising speed although, they may, in some circumstances, be more commercially viable for certain routes. The feasible flight schedules will be dependent on sector length and turnround times, but typically three daily rotations to destinations in western Europe (eg southern Spain and Portugal) would require an initial departure ex-KIA in the early morning (0600-0700 hours) and a final return to base at between 2300-2400 hours). Given the nature of the fleet and the typical sector lengths for many of EUjet’s routes, it is difficult to avoid a number of arrival flights into KIA in the late evening.
Forecasted traffic growth and implications for aircraft noise
EUjet have stated that they expect to carry some 300,000 passengers through KIA in its first year of operation. This is expected to rise to 2 million passengers per annum by the end of the third year of operation. Longer-term traffic projections (eg in ‘Strategic Master Plan for the Development of Manston Airport’, Arthur D Little, March 2001) suggest that traffic might rise to 3.5 million by 2010 and to 4.4 million by 2015. These longer-term projections, are however, beyond the scope of this particular exercise. We understand that the latest noise contours produced (Bickerdike Allen Partners – February/March 2002 – Appendix A) show daytime LAeq, 16 hr noise contours for the Summer Periods 2000 and 2001 and the Annual Period 26/9/00-26/9/01. These were based on the actual traffic mix (ATMs) during these periods. Forecasted noise contours were also prepared for Summer 2005, based on the then-projected traffic mix of dedicated freighter aircraft and passenger aircraft (2 mppa). The analysis was on a total of 14,880 ATMs, of
EU00142:FINAL REPORT PAGE 23
which 1,980 were by dedicated freighter aircraft (B747-200/DC8/IL76), 840 by larger passenger aircraft (MD11 or equivalent), 2260 by B757/B767 (or equivalent) and 9,800 by B737 (or equivalent). Given the change in the actual traffic mix (eg a decline in the level of dedicated freighters and an increase in the number of B737 movements), we suggest that new contours should be prepared for 2004 (based on actual data) and for 2005, 2006 and 2007 (using the most recent traffic forecasts). In terms of night noise, it is possible to prepare LAeq 8 hour noise contours over the period 2300-0700. However, as the normal procedure is to average all aircraft movements over the full 8 hour period, this may not necessarily reflect the intensity of noise during the periods 2300-2400 or 0600-0700. A better method of establishing noise disturbance levels is to prepare a single event 90 dBA SEL contour based on an arrival or departure aircraft. The 90 dBA SEL contour is recognised as the threshold of those at risk from sleep disturbance from aircraft. It is recommended that these SEL contours should be established for a departure and arrival by a Fokker F100 aircraft (in both runway directions). These contours, together with an analysis of the numbers of households affected, should be used for further discussions on future noise controls.
KIA - Existing Section 106 Agreement
The following observations and recommendations relate to two documents: • • Firstly the current Section 106 Agreement (Second Schedule) Secondly a proposals for a night flying policy put forward by PlaneStation early in 2005
It should be stressed that the current Section 106 Agreement was established when the airport was predominantly freight-orientated and must therefore be amended for the current low-cost passenger operations.
Current Section 106 Agreement – Night flying policy
With very few exceptions, the majority of UK airports operate on a 24 hour basis, albeit with night time flights being a small proportion of overall air traffic activity. Paras 1.2 and 1.3 relate to the preparation of a Night Flying Policy at least six months prior to the start of such operations. The present request for a programme of 16 regular weekly movements during the night time period of Summer 2005 season, asks for an amendment to the S106 Agreement, which needs consideration. A S106 Agreement should be in a form that the principles and procedures are valid for a reasonable period, rather than subject to regular variation to cover unanticipated activity. It is felt that, if the Council is so minded to agree the the current request, this should take the form of a separate agreement on a one-time basis to allow these specific flights, but that the S106 itself remain unaltered. Activity at KIA means it is not busy enough to be a Coordinated Airport, where slot allocation is negotiated between airlines and airports on an international basis. This is a twice yearly process that normally occurs some six months before the start of the effective season (summer/winter) of operation, although the turbulent nature of the airline business involving Low Cost Carriers tends to be more volatile in terms of more limited notice before introducing new services. Para 1.4.1 considers exempting certain arrivals and departures between 06.00 and 07.00hrs from night flying restrictions. It is not clear the number of flights envisaged during this period. Surveys and experience at other airports has shown that 06.00 to 07.00hrs, of a 23.00 to 07.00 Night Period, can be a sensitive period in terms of airport noise to nearby residents. At many airports this “shoulder period” is considered specifically (together with an “evening shoulder period” of 23.00 to 23.30hrs), and restrictions on these shoulder periods of activity may need to be introduced if noise disturbance is significant In respect of exemptions for humanitarian flights, the airport should be obliged to inform, in advance, the Council and the surrounding communities of the prospect of such a night movement, as part of overall community relations. It
is unclear whether 12 landings and takeoffs (ie 24 movements) are meant by Para 1.4.2. In the past KIA has been an airport where major maintenance was carried out on older aircraft operated by countries outside of Europe and the US, where noise regulation is less demanding. Many of these aircraft fall into the Chapter 2 classification, and cannot now be legally operated by western airlines. If however business opportunities still exist on KIA for such work, consideration may need to be given to whether any such aircraft will be allowed to operate into and from the airport in the future, even on a restricted basis, and whether the S106 should reflect this issue. Under penalties in Para 1.5.1, the recurring noise violations penalty is restricted to the “same aircraft”, that is to say, an individual and specific aircraft. An airline may operate a number of different aircraft of similar type throughout its service network, it is therefore suggested that the definition should be changed to cover cumulative violation repetitions by any aircraft of the same type operated by the same carrier. Reference is made in several paras to aircraft Quota Count (QC) scores. These stem from the nightflying movement and night quota system formally operated at the three Designated Airports (Heathrow, Gatwick, Stansted) and operated on an informal basis at a number of other non-designated airports. The QC “score” is a shorthand for the degree of noise created by an aircraft for both takeoff and landing. The QC is based on the Certified Noise Levels as follows:
Quota Count Scoring System Certified Noise Level (EPNdB) More Than 101.9 99-101.9 96-98.9 93-95.9 90-92.9 Less than 90 Quota Count 16 8 4 2 1 0.5
Schedules giving the Quota Counts for each aircraft type, subtype and engine fit are published by the CAA as part of its Aeronautical Information Services (AIS). However this is only one part of a night flying restriction process that sets a maximum number to the actual movements (takeoffs or landings) allowed during the night period, in addition to setting a maximum Quota Allowance based on the noise of any movement. The limit to night time activity is which ever of these two elements reaches its limit first. It encourages the use at night of the quieter aircraft (for example eight movements by QC0.5 aircraft “use up” the same Quota Allowance as a single movement by a QC4 aircraft). In considering a future Night Flying Policy the setting of both a limit to the number of movements and to a maximum quota allowance should be considered. The amount of quota can be set to ensure that a limited number of night slots are used in the least intrusive way. Simply having a Night Movement limit alone does not have this incentive.
General noise limitations
The 1996 63dBA LAeq contour referred to in Para 2.1.1 was based on previous aircraft movements by RAF jets. As no other noise contours were available following transfer of the airport to civilian use, this was used as a ‘worst case scenario’ in terms of limiting noise level exposure. As an alternative to the retrospective production of Noise Contours every two years, a future forecast contour for projected activity for some years ahead, 2010 say, could be produced to assess in advance the likely scale of noise contour and disturbance than could be expected. It is assumed the percentage increases in contour size referred to in Para 2.2 on penalties are by measured area.
Dwelling insulation scheme
As with the points made above in Section 2, the basis of the noise contour used is the concern. In the proposal the contour used will always be retrospective, whereas the creation of a set of future forecasts contours setting out the progression of the Insulation Scheme boundary over time would enable works to be implemented by the time the noise impact reached the affected properties, rather than some time after. There is reference to an intention to “indicate….what level of noise retardation is to be achieved”. Noise insulation schemes have been carried at the major London and regional airports for some 35 years. Any scheme of works proposed for the KIA Noise Insulation Scheme should be comparable in scope of works, scheme eligibility criteria and noise attenuation performance to the standards set by these established schemes
Preferred departure runway
The use of a preferential takeoff direction away from major urban areas is to be encouraged. It is noted that the airport has a target that runway 28 should be used for at least 70% of all departures and for all night time passenger arrival flights, subject to aviation and safety reasons. These targets are, of course, dependent on the prevailing meteorological conditions (eg a maximum of a 5 mph tail wind on the runway), although KIA’s long runway length does provide an additional safety margin. There is no indication of any penalty that might be incurred if the proposed target is not achieved, taking into account circumstances outside the airport’s control. As a general point, it is felt that if a performance target is set there is a need for a matching penalty for non-compliance, otherwise the incentive of the target is lost. Should there be sound reasons why the current target for preferential runway use cannot be achieved, then perhaps the target should be revised to a more meaningful figure, but with penalties.
There also needs to a clear and “auditable” process to assess the validity of the occasions when the use of a preferred runway is not possible because of operational limits, to remove any suspicion that the preferred use target is not being pursued.
Noise abatement routes
It is assumed the National Air Traffic Service has approved the procedures outlined in Para 5.1.a/b/c. It is unclear why other elements of the planned noise abatement procedures, not set out in Para 5, cannot be provided “until two months of the date of the agreement” rather than be identified and incorporated within the Agreement. There is no indication of what penalties may be applied to airport or to the aircraft operators if these procedures are breached, to encourage future compliance.
Noise monitoring terminals
The provision of a more substantial Noise Monitoring System is fundamental to the monitoring and regulation of the airport’s operation. On this basis, there are some questions of the adequacy of an additional two Noise Monitoring Terminals (NMTs), as set out in Para 6.1.1, in achieving the necessary standard of surveillance. In terms of the minimum provision for a first stage monitoring system, it is suggested that at each end of the runway three microphone NMTs be considered. These would all be located at the internationally recognised distance of 3.5 nautical miles/6.5 kilometres from the point at the opposite runway end where takeoff is begun, to reflect the measurement locations used in the standard ICAO/FAA Noise Certification process. One NMT should be placed along the extended centreline of the runway, with the other two positioned some 1 to 1.5km either side of the centreline NMT at the same 6.5 km distance from start of roll. This three NMT layout should be repeated for the other end of the runway for takeoffs or landings in the other direction. By providing the trio of NMT sensors the resulting noise readings from these can be interpreted to establish a noise level due to the aircraft movement, and also whether the aircraft has turned relative to the central and outer NMT locations. All readings are fed back to a central computer, and recorded and stored for future reference for complaint or operational purposes. The present Kent International Airport system of a single fixed NMT on the extended centreline at each end of the runway, combined with a portable device, cannot be expected to obtain consistent and comprehensive information on the Airport’s activities on a robust basis. A further stage of refinement to the basic two groups of three NMTs layout described would be to add to the basic system the SSR radar information, to provide greater detail on each movement and a visual record of the flight path.
EU00142:FINAL REPORT PAGE 28
Such additional investment would need to be programmed when airport activity had grown beyond current levels to justify the expenditure.
Pollution monitoring schemes examining atmospheric pollutants and particulates, together with surface water contamination, are established at a number of UK airports. Any scheme introduced should reflect the accepted methods and standards of these schemes.
The principle to set upper noise limits is accepted, and should apply to both day and night periods. The value and success of a noise monitoring procedure will be dependant on the quality of the monitoring system installed, as discussed above. It is unclear whether the 5% reduction target applies to measurement of individual noise events, or whether “average over the previous two years” applies to the area of a related noise contour for the period.
Whilst some adhoc engine testing may be required, Section 9.1 has no limit as to the duration of any testing, a sensitive issue especially during the late evening period. Any proposal for a permanent location (Section 9.3) should include evidence regarding noise levels created by the testing, and likely disturbance beyond the airport boundary, particularly in any residential location. This noise evaluation should also include examination of any alternative locations, and the reasons for their rejection.
Green travel strategy
All airports in England and Wales with annual air transport movements of more than 1,000 per year are required to prepare an Airport Surface Access Strategy (ASAS) and set up an Air Transport Forum. The ASAS should set short term and long term targets for decreasing the proportion of by car, and increasing the proportion using public transport, for both passengers and airport workers. A Green Transport Plan (GTP) would be a subsequent product of the ASAS and the ATF The reality is that the ATF is a monitoring, advisory and consultative body – not an executive body - whose key role is to assess the implementation of the ASAS and recommend how it could adapt to respond to its original targets, and as time passes perhaps more stringently revise these targets, together with agreeing the form and also monitoring the success- or otherwise - of the GTP. It is possible that an ATF, in its initial years, could be a specialist subcommittee of the Airport Consultative Committee.
EU00142:FINAL REPORT PAGE 29
As an initial action, Section 10.1 therefore should require the production of a comprehensive traffic and access strategy for at least a five year period, to include searching modal shift targets for passengers and employees, as required by the Department for Transport’s guidelines. With an ASAS established the additional impact of any unanticipated development would then need to be assessed as outlined in principle in Section 10.2 Ideally the Airport ought to have submitted an ASAS by now, so that realistic and binding targets can be incorporated into the S.106 Agreement completion. This does not appear to be the current intention.
The proposals in Section 11.1.1 and Section 11.1.2 are to firstly submit a Master Plan, which would then be followed, after and interval, by an Environmental Statement (ES) based on the Master Plan. It is disappointing the neither of these items are available for evaluation prior the completion of the S106 Agreement, although the willingness to proceed with these is welcomed. The main concern is the separation of the Master Plan and the subsequent Environmental Statement, which is the primary means to assess the proposals set out in the Master Pan. The submitted Master Plan should therefore be expedited as quickly as possible, and should include the submission of the Environmental Statement at the same time. Surface access issues are also very relevant to this exercise, as raised in Section 10. On this basis, there is a pressing need to establish between KIA and the Council the Scoping process for the Environmental Statement, mentioned in 11.2, in order to achieve a comprehensive picture of the airport’s ambitions and the environmental and other operational issues that may result.
Experience at other UK airports is that the creation of some form of “Community Fund” financed by fines for non-compliance to operational regulations has considerable benefits in demonstrating effective management by the airport, and strong discipline of airport activities by the Council. Difficulties can arise from the exact terms of eligibility for fund grants, where a key issue for such community funds is to ensure that the allocation of the funds demonstrably benefits those affected by the Airport’s activities. In the context of the legal test of whether an Obligation in a Section 106 was valid, it is necessary to show that the relationship between the benefit and the affected recipient was legitimate “planning gain”.
It is important that the airport owner/manager ensures that the obligations and commitments set out in any agreement are recognised and acknowledged by all organisations or parties based at or using the airport, nor simply implemented by the management company alone. Lease arrangements, involvement in Green Travel Plans and adherence to environmental regulations, as examples, should be fundamental to the relationship between all those at the airport and in the surrounding communities.
Airport Master Plan
The lack of a comprehensive Master Plan supported by environmental and transport evaluations is a major issue at this point, in the process between Kent International Airport and Thanet Council. At the larger UK airports, both in London and in the Regions, Government introduced in July 2004 the DfT Guidance on the Preparation of Airport Market Planswhjich set out requirements for the submission and preparation of Master Plans looking some 25 years ahead, for agreement with national strategy. There is the likelihood that Master Plans so approved could then be formally integrated in to the formal Development and Spatial Plans process. The criteria for this formal requirement is that the airports so designated have been identified in the White Paper for significant development, or are forecast to have a minimum of 20,000 Air Transport Movements in 2030. Without any firm long term forecasts for even the immediate future, it is difficult to estimate when KIA might achieve the latter criteria and so be formally required to formulate a Master Plan for DfT approval. However in view of the stated ambitions of the airport, and the lack of any clear existing picture of growth plans for the airport, the early preparation of a Strategic Growth Plan that follows the principles within the DfT Guidance is considered essential. In respect of KIA, a Master Plan with a forward view of 30 years is unrealistic, although one giving a statement of intentions for the next 5 to 10 years is an urgently needed first step. Thereby, a clear picture would be set for the neighbouring communities, for some time ahead, of the likely nature and extent of the airport’s operations and ambitions. For the airport, there would be benefits from recognition as part of the future formal landuse strategy for the area, which should ease certain problems of plan implementation that can be experienced at present.
To properly manage noise and environmental matters related to the operation and future growth of the airport, it will be essential to have in place a rigorous and comprehensive monitoring process. This needs to be adequately resourced, in terms of equipment and staff, and have in place clear and measurable targets and standards which have been mutually agreed, with related penalties for non-compliance.
EU00142:FINAL REPORT PAGE 31
Demonstrable monitoring and enforcement is essential, also, in regard to the confidence within the surrounding communities that the airport’s activities are taking place under the influence and control of the Council.
Second Draft – Night Flying Policy
The second draft derives from the requirement in the Second Schedule, addressed above, for the Airport to prepare a Night Flying Policy at least six months ahead of start of any such operations. However for the Summer season of 2005, on an exceptional basis, the Council agreed to the late submission of such proposals. The agreement by the Council to this late submission by PlaneStation in no way committed the Council that any further proposals for future periods would be accepted or agreed. The following paragraphs review and comment on this Second Draft.
Purpose of Night Flying Policy
The requirement for night time movements results from the scheduling problems that EUjet, as a new airline, has experienced in obtaining departure slots from continental airports that allow a takeoff time sufficiently early for the aircraft to arrive at KIA before the start of the Night Time Period. It would be expected that in future years the airline will be able to become involved in the international process whereby slots at airports worldwide are bid for against other airlines, and therefore anticipate obtaining more favourable departure slot timings to satisfy restrictions at KIA.
The EUjet fleet of Fokker F100 aircraft are Noise Score QC 0.5. However maintenance and other operational issues with these aircraft may require the airline to hire replacement aircraft in order to carry out its services. These aircraft could be of other types, such as the Boeing 737. Depending on the specific model, of the 737 for example, some earlier versions do not satisfy QC 0.5 criteria, whilst newer versions can. Therefore, should such substitution occur, evidence must be provided on each occasion of the specific aircraft and its sub-type used in order to verify the QC Rating with the published CAA Schedule of Aircraft.
Landing Direction and Route
As addressed above in principle in Section 6.5, any non compliance to the desired policy of all night landings all being from the West on Runway 10 must be justified with appropriate data.
Monitoring and Reporting
The process of regular and early reporting set out in Section 6.1 is to be encouraged. In Section 6.2, whilst the reporting of the individual maximum noise level is useful, it is unclear how this will be achieved with the current and any future monitoring procedures on a consistent basis. Neither is it clear how “night
EU00142:FINAL REPORT PAGE 32
time noise contours” will be calculated, nor on what basis – each aircraft, each night, per week or per month of the reporting period.
The reference to “aircraft not scheduled” in Section 7.1 does not state whether this applies only to scheduled passenger services, or would also apply to regular scheduled activity by freight aircraft. The question of substitute non QC0.5 aircraft is referred to in Section 6.19 above.
The Second Draft in conjunction with the earlier Second Schedule go some way towards establishing and defining a night Flying Policy that could be implemented for operations at KIA. As discussed, however, there are still a considerable number of questions to be answered, particularly in respect of the capability of available monitoring resources to be able to correctly and consistently provide an accurate picture of the environmental noise nuisance in the vicinity of the Airport. The continuing lack of information on future activity levels and market forecasts is considered a major problem, since these are needed to properly evaluate the longer term environmental situation that is essential in order to fully judge the Airport’s ambitions.
Review of Section 106 Agreements at other UK Airports
Birmingham International Airport
A Section 106 Agreement was implemented in July 1996 between Birmingham International Airport Ltd and the Metropolitan Borough of Solihull as a condition of approval of planning permission for expanding passenger terminal facilities at the airport. The Agreement contained the following schedules: • • • • • • • • Schedule 1 (Land Use/Planning) Schedule 2 (Surface Transport) Schedule 3 (Highways and Drainage Works) Schedule 4 (Noise Control) Schedule 5 (Night Flying) Schedule 6 (Air Quality) Schedule 7 (Air Traffic) Schedule 8 (Community Benefits and Environmental Improvements)
Schedule 1 is primarily concerned with the conditions attached to the terminal development, the compulsory purchase of residential properties and the consultation process with local residents. Schedule 2 sets out obligations for the airport to prepare a public transport plan and a multi-modal interchange study to promote the increased use of public transport to and from the airport. A public transport modal share of 20% is targeted by the end of 2005. Under the Agreement, the airport is obliged to commit an agreed sum to promote projects contributing towards the increased use of public transport to and from the airport. Schedule 3 sets out the airport’s financial obligations in relation to the construction of a new access road to the terminal development and improvements to the local road network, including the widening of the A45. Schedule 4 gives the airport’s obligations concerning noise control. This includes a noise insulation scheme for eligible residential properties and schools (provided to over 7000 local homes) and provides details of the noise monitoring and complaints system and restrictions on engine testing. (A daytime noise limit of 92 dB(A) at the noise monitors positioned 6.5 km from start of roll was introduced in January 2003. For each infringement, there is a fine of £500 plus a further £150 for each decibel recorded over 92 dB(A), with all funds generated placed into a Community Trust Fund). Schedule 5 covers the agreement on night flying. The original Section 106 included a Quota Count system and a night violation and charges system. This has been subsequently upgraded and now also includes a strict aircraft movement limit between 2300-0600, split by season (24% winter and 76% summer). From 2005 onwards, this limit will be 5% of total movements in the
EU00142:FINAL REPORT PAGE 34
previous financial year. An annual Quota Count of 4,000 applies and aircraft with a noise quota value greater than 4 are not allowed to operate during the night period. Other controls include a night noise limit of 87 dB(A), with infringements surcharged by a fine equivalent to the full runway charge. There are also constraints on the use of specific runways and restrictions on the use of certain aircraft stands to protect local residents from ground noise. Schedule 6 gives details of a diffusion tube and an ambient air quality monitoring system to provide measurements of emissions attributable for the operations of the airport. The airport is obliged to make a financial contribution for an annual air quality survey (up to a maximum of £100,000) and to take appropriate measures if this falls below the minimum standard set by the World Health Organisation, the European Union or the HM Government’s expert advisory panel on air quality standards (EPAQS). Schedule 7 sets out the airport’s obligations in establishing noise preferential routes following public consultation. The airport is required to monitor trackkeeping and publish a report on airline performance at least quarterly. All deviations more than 1.5 kilometres from the centreline of the standard instrument departure (SID) route at a height of less than 3000 feet should be bought to the attention of the aircraft operator. Schedule 8 provides details of the Community Trust Fund referred to above. The objectives of the fund as to enhance the natural and built environment in the area affected by the airport, including the provision of recreational, leisure and educational facilities. Under the Section 106 Agreement for the new terminal development, the airport is obliged to contribute £50,000 per annum towards this fund, together with all income from surcharges raised from the violation of the day and night flying policies.
London City Airport
Planning permission was granted in July 1998 for an increase in Air Transport Movements at London City Airport subject to Section 106 Agreement between Newham Council and the Airport. This covered a range of environmental protection issues (including noise and air quality), surface access and jobs/training matters. Under Clause 7.7, the Airport was required to submit a new and extended Noise Management Scheme for approval by the Council, following consultation with the Airport Consultative Committee. The key elements of the Noise Management Scheme include: • Airport and airline operator awareness (through the appointment of a specialist airport environmental officer and an airline air safety committee) Provision of a combined noise monitoring and track-keeping system (with four recording positions). The system is to be regularly calibrated and maintained and, in the case of failure, additional back-up equipment is to be kept by the Airport Preparation of noise contours (57 dB LAeq 16hour) based on actual noise trials of aircraft operated at London City Airport Limitations on the use of noisier aircraft types (up to 94.5 PNdB)
• • •
Limitations on the number of annual and daily ATMs and the use of a factored movement system based on aircraft type noise levels (similar to a Quota Count). The factored movements should not exceed specified annual or weekly limits Limitations on the use of engine ground running and auxiliary power units (APUs). The limit on engine ground running is set as the equivalent of 60 dB LAeq, T (where T is any period of 12 hours) free field as measured outside and at one metre from any existing residential premises in the vicinity of the airport Provision of soundproofing to local homes and schools Stipulation against the excessive use of reverse thrust on arrival without the clear need to do so A system of penalties to airline operators for noisy departures (in excess of the maximum dB limit), for the use of reverse thrust on arrival and for exceptional deviation from track. Conversely a credit (or bonus point) to be awarded for quiet departures
In terms of air quality, the Section 106 Agreement requires the installation of air quality monitoring equipment near a local school to measure fine particulates (PM10) and nitrogen dioxide (NO2). An annual report is to be submitted annual to the Council and the Airport Consultative Committee.
Manchester International Airport
Manchester Airport PLC signed a Section 106 Agreement jointly with Cheshire County Council and Manchester City Council in August 1994. The Agreement related to the development of a second runway at the airport. The main schedules of the Agreement cover: • • Community Obligations (Sound Insulation Grant Scheme and Community Trust Scheme) Noise Control (Impact, Noise Monitoring and Track-keeping, Aircraft Operations Policy, Runway Utilisation, Engine Testing) Night Flying (including a Quota Count) Environmental Mitigation Works Highway Improvements Public Transport Improvements (including extension of the Metrolink and schemes to promote public transport access by passenger and airport employees)
• • • •
The Community Obligations cover the provision of a Sound Insulation Grant Scheme to domestic properties within the 62 LAeq (24 hour) contour. This is to be reviewed annually. A Community Trust Fund is to be established by the Airport Company with an annual budget of £100,000 plus aircraft noise penalties. This will provide expenditure on schemes for environmental improvement within areas directly or indirectly affected by the airport’s operations.
EU00142:FINAL REPORT PAGE 36
The Noise Control measures include provision that the noise impact of the airport’s operations should be no worse than that measured in 1992. This obligation extends to at least 2011. The noise impact is measure in terms of the maximum noise levels of departing traffic (average of the noisiest 10% of movements) and the modelled area of the 60 LAeq (0700-2300) noise contour. If either of these is greater than the equivalent areas in 1992, the Airport is in breach of this obligation. The Airport is required to maintain a noise monitoring and track-keeping system and provide annual noise contours for the preceeding year and for the next two years. Noise monitoring and community complaints reports are to be published monthly. Other objectives include a commitment that 96% of total scheduled operations should be by Chapter 3 aircraft by 2000. Further obligations include limitations on night time engine running, a target to increase use of fixed electrical power units and noise track-keeping targets of a 5% (1.5 km) deviation from the centreline of the standard instrument departure routings. Night flying controls are similar to that of daytime flying (eg no expansion of maximum noise levels of departing traffic or the 60 LAeq night noise contour. Maximum night time movement limits and a Quota Count system are applied. Night flights must not exceed a maximum of 7% of total movements until at least 2011 – whilst the annual Quota Count (Points Budget) is 3900 (Winter) and 8750 (Summer) up to 2005. Further restrictions apply to the use of the second runway at night and to the use of reverse thrust. The environmental mitigation works relate to a package of measures to minimise the impact of the second runway on landscape and ecological interests. This includes protection for local wildlife including newts and other amphibians, bats and badgers, as well as general landscaping. The Airport’s obligations towards highways and local public transport links include financial contributions to specified schemes and the active promotion of public transport by the commitment of not less than 10% of the airport’s marketing budget towards this objective. Targets for the use of public transport and car sharing schemes by airport staff are also to be established.
Current KIA Section 106 Agreement Main (Second) Schedule
SECOND SCHEDULE This schedule sets out the obligations of the Owner and the Council
Night-time Flying Noise Policy 1.1 The Owner agrees not to cause suffer or permit any Regular Night Flying Operations at any time (subject to paragraph 1.4 below) before a Night-time Flying Noise Policy shall have been prepared and a copy lodged with the Council. 1.2 The Owner will prepare the Night-time Flying Noise Policy at least six months before the commencement of any Regular Night Flying Operations after consulting with the Council in accordance with paragraph 1.3 below. The policy will specifically address the following matters: 1.2.1 the restriction on those aircraft likely to cause unacceptable disturbance, such that no aircraft with a noise classification in excess of Quota Count 4 shall be permitted to take off or to land during Night-time 1.2.2 a process for the sharing of data on details of aircraft operating during Night-time; and 1.2.3 the embodiment of the principles of UK best practice at the time and the appropriateness of those principles to prevailing local conditions 1.3 The consultation process shall include providing all relevant information to the Council and affording an adequate period within which the Council may consider the issues arising and formulate its views which shall be taken into account by the Owner and due weight given to such views; in the event that the Owner does not propose to accept the views of the Council in formulating its policy it shall first provide to the Council a reasoned justification and shall take into account and give due weight to such further views of the Council as may be expressed 1.4 The Owner shall not be obliged to prepare a Night-time Flying Noise Policy where Flight Movements during Night-time will involve:
16 August 2000
departures to European destinations or arrivals from North America by solely passenger carrying aircraft scheduled to occur between 0600 and 0700 on any day where the aircraft involved in the operation have a noise classification of Quota Count 4 or less; or
humanitarian mercy or emergency flights by relief organisations on not more than 12 occasions during any calendar year
The Owner will: 1.5.1 (and whether or not a Night-time Flying Noise Policy has been prepared but subject to paragraph 1.6 below) pay £1,000 for the first occasion when an aircraft with a noise classification in excess of Quota Count 4 undertakes a Flight Movement during Night-time and during the following twelve calendar months to pay an amount increased by a factor of two for each successive occasion by the same aircraft (namely £2,000 for the second occasion £4,000 for the third occasion £8,000 for the fourth occasion and so on) and at the end of such twelve month period the payments shall recommence at the level of £1,000 and a further period of twelve months as aforesaid shall follow and such increasing payments shall be made 1.5.2 not cause suffer or permit any training flights during Night-time by any jet or large aircraft (being an aircraft with a maximum take-off weight in excess of 5700 kg) and to pay £10,000 for each and every occasion when a contravention occurs
The Owner shall be under no obligation to make any payment under paragraph 1.5.1 above where the Flight Movement concerns the type of flight referred to in paragraph 1.4.2 above and whether or not the aircraft had a noise classification in excess of Quota Count 4
General Noise Limitations 2.1 The Owner with a view to ensuring that the operation of aircraft shall cause the least disturbance by reason of noise will:
16 August 2000
2.1.1 ensure that the number of Flight Movements during the first 12 months following the date of this Agreement shall not result in any expansion of the 1996 63dBLAeq (16-hour 0700 - 2300 hours) contour as identified on Plan 3; and 2.1.2 within 12 months of the date of this Agreement and again between 21 and 24 months of the date of this Agreement submit to the Council a 63dBLAeq (16-hour 0700 - 2300 hours) noise contour map for the Airport based on the previous 12 months of airport operations, which will have been produced by an independent and appropriately qualified consultant using ANCON or INM models (or agreed alternatives) 2.2 If the Owner fails to comply with any obligation in paragraph 2.1 above by the appropriate date or in the event that the 63dBLAeq (16-hour) contour so produced has expanded beyond the same contour produced in 1996 as identified on Plan 3 but not by more than 5% the Owner shall pay a sum of £10,000 and if by more than 5% but not by more than 10% the Owner shall pay a sum of £40,000 and if by more than 10% the Owner shall pay a sum of £100,000 3. Dwelling Insulation Scheme The Owner will within 24 months of the date of this Agreement submit to the Council a detailed scheme for noise insulation of dwellings that fall within the 63dBLAeq (16-hour 0700 - 2300 hours) contour for the Airport. The contour shall be calculated on actual Flight Movements during the previous 12-month period and annually re-calculated in terms of any potential extensions of the scheme. The scheme of noise insulation
submitted will indicate to the Council what level of noise retardation is to be achieved and over what period
16 August 2000
Preferred Departure Runway The Owner will: 4.1 adopt the use of runway 28 as the preferred departure runway and will use its reasonable endeavours to achieve a target of seventy per cent (70%) of all departures on that runway subject to safety requirements at all times and to air traffic and weather requirements; and 4.2 supply data on runway departure usage to the Council and MACC on a monthly basis
Noise Abatement Routes The Owner will: 5.1 within two months from the date of this Agreement submit to the Council details of the noise abatement measures it will require (subject to safety requirements at all times) operators of jet and large aircraft (any aircraft with a maximum take-off weight in excess of 5700Kg) to use which will include the requirements that: (a) when departing to the west (runway 28) on achieving 1.5 miles DME (airport distance measuring equipment) make a right turn to the north west onto heading 300º and to climb to a height of 3000 feet, before setting an alternative course (b) not to descend below 1500 feet when carrying out circuits until entering final approach to the runway; (c) to endeavour to fly over the sea when operating on the northern circuit, which shall be at least 3 nautical miles from the centre point of the runway, except when using the noise abatement take off route or when entering the final approach to the runway; and (d) to endeavour when operating on the southern circuit to keep north of and clear of the town of Sandwich
16 August 2000
submit to the Council and to MACC a monthly list of all breaches identified by the Owner of the noise abatement measures referred to in 5.1
Noise Monitoring Terminals 6.1 The Owner will: 6.1.1 within nine months from the date of this Agreement (subject to first being able to acquire any third party land and obtain any planning permission required for which he will use all reasonable endeavour to achieve) install at least two Noise Monitoring Terminals which shall have been agreed by an independent aviation acoustic consultant having regard to the guidelines laid down by the International Civil Aviation Organisation; 6.1.2 calibrate and maintain the Noise Monitoring Terminals in accordance with manufacturer’s instructions; 6.1.3 provide the results of the noise monitoring to the Council and MACC on a monthly basis; and 6.1.4 within nine months from the date of this Agreement provide for use by the Council a digital audio tape recorder with a type 1 front end with a remote handset controller for recording which complies fully with all appropriate British Standards/Codes of Practice for use in domestic and educational properties and thereafter be responsible for both repair and replacement of the unit 6.2 The Council will on receipt of the portable noise monitoring unit supplied by the Owner assume responsibility for maintenance and calibration of the unit and keep the unit suitably and adequately insured with a reputable insurer for its replacement value in the event of loss damage and third party claims
Pollution Monitoring The Owner will: 7.1 within nine months from the date of this Agreement (subject to first being able to acquire any third party land and obtain any planning permission required and
16 August 2000
having used all reasonably endeavours to achieve such) install not less than three passive atmospheric pollution monitoring tubes at such locations as the Owner (using a best practice policy) may determine; 7.2 the pollutants to be monitored at each site will be determined by the Owner in consultation with the Council and in accordance with any good practice policy advised by the Department of Trade and Industry; and 7.3 provide the results of the pollution monitoring to the Council and MACC on a monthly basis 8. Noise Monitoring The Owner will: 8.1 by 1st April 2002 or having carried out twelve months of noise monitoring at the Airport agree with the Council new maximum noise levels for aircraft movements which will produce a significant reduction in the noise impact for individual aircraft over the previous two years of operation and which in no circumstances will be less than a 5% reduction over the average of the previous two years. Failure to agree on a suitable reduction level will result in the matter of a suitable reduction level being put to a mutually agreed and independent expert in aviation matters, or in the event of failure to agree within one month he shall be appointed by the President of the Institute of Vibration and Acoustic Engineers. The expert will decide the appropriate level of reduction suitable for the Airport by reference to the levels of individual aircraft noise acceptable at one or more comparable airports, judged to be comparable by reference to the characteristics of operation and geographic proximity to urban areas. The expert will act as an expert and not as an arbitrator and shall be entitled to rely on his own judgement and opinion. He shall afford the Parties a reasonable opportunity to submit both representations and counter-representations to him and shall consider all of the same. He shall give to the Parties written notice of his determination (within 25 working days after counter-representations) (if any) and his decision shall be binding on both Parties to the Agreement in respect of the level of reduction to be achieved; and
16 August 2000
on and after 1st April 2002 pay the sum of £500 per aircraft exceeding the agreed or imposed maximum noise level referred to in 8.1 and for every 1 decibel (dB) above the agreed base level the additional sum of £500
Engine Testing The Owner agrees: 9.1 that no Engine Testing (other than for emergency purposes which shall in any case not exceed five separate occurrences in any calendar year) shall occur within the Property between 2300 - 0800 hours. Between 2100 - 2300 hours the number of occurrences of Engine Testing (whether for emergency purposes or otherwise) shall not exceed 10 separate occurrences in any calendar year. For every
occurrence of Engine Testing above these limits the Owner will pay the sum of £1,000. For the purposes of this provision “emergency” shall be taken to refer to any occurrence or circumstances not reasonably foreseeable; 9.2 within six months from the date of this Agreement to submit to the Council a proposal for the location of an Engine Testing Area located in such a position as to minimise potential noise disturbance; 9.3 thereafter to be restricted to this defined location and that: (a) no continuous Engine Testing will exceed a period of sixty minutes duration and that a break of a period at least equal to the period of any Engine Testing shall be allowed after any Engine Testing before any further Engine Testing takes place; (b) Engine Testing will be restricted to 0800 - 2100 hours (other than in the circumstances referred to in 9.1 above); (c) the alignment of any aircraft on which engines are being tested will be such as to project the noise envelope over the maximum airport area; and (d) the cumulative effect of Engine Testing will be restricted to ensure that the 13-hour noise level around the Airport does not increase by more than 1dB (as determined by benchmark background noise measurement)
16 August 2000
Not knowingly to permit any aircraft to land at the Property for the purpose of any Engine Testing on any land adjoining the Property except in accordance with the terms of paragraph 9.
10. Green Travel Strategy The Owner will: 10.1 within one month from the date of this Agreement appoint a recognised and agreed Traffic Consultant to produce a Green Travel Strategy for the development of the Airport for a period of at least five years and ensure that the draft strategy is submitted to the Council for agreement within three months of the consultant being appointed. The draft strategy will address how the Owner its tenants and licensees will take steps to encourage employees working within the airport boundaries, and visitors to the Airport, to travel by means other than the private car. In the event of failure to agree within one month the Traffic Consultant shall be appointed by the President of the Institute of Highway and Transportation Engineers on application by either the Council or the Owner 10.2 ensure that each application for planning permission, or each consultation submitted to the Council in accordance with the GPDO for new development proposals within the Property shall be accompanied by a Green Travel Plan related to the development proposal which will indicate how the proposal accords with the Green Travel Strategy referred to in 10.1 above 11. Environmental Statement 11.1 The Owner will: 11.1.1 within six months of the date of this Agreement submit to the Council the Master Plan 11.1.2 within a further period of six months from the date of submission of the Master Plan and based on the information contained in the Master Plan submit an Environmental Statement for consideration by the Council
16 August 2000
11.2 Prior to and in sufficient time to enable the Owner to comply with the obligation in paragraph 11.1.2 apply to the Council for a Scoping Opinion 11.3 The Environmental Statement shall be prepared by an independent recognised environmental consultant whose appointment and terms of reference have first been agreed in writing with the Council. In the event of failure to agree within one month the consultant shall be appointed by the President of the Royal Town Planning Institute on application by either the Council or the Owner 12. Payments 12.1 The references in paragraphs 1, 2, 8 and 9 of this Schedule to any sums of money to be paid by the Owner shall mean an obligation for the Owner to pay such sums to a fund to be called MAEIF within one month of the occurrence in question. 12.2 If MACC shall have been constituted as a charitable or other trust and shall administer MAEIF the same shall be expended at the discretion of such trust. 12.3 If MACC does not become so constituted or fails to administer MAEIF payments shall be made to the Council and may be expended by the Council in consultation with MACC (or in the event that the same or any trust formed ceases to exist or fails to respond to any requests for consultation then at the discretion of the Council after consultation with the Owner) for the purposes of environmental improvements for the general public good in the vicinity of the Airport (but outside the perimeter of the Airport). In the event that no expenditure within the vicinity of the Airport is considered appropriate any balance of funds may be expended on similar environmental improvements for the general public good. 13. Third Parties To use such controls rights or other measure available to the Owner (whether arising by way of contract statutory power or otherwise) to ensure so far as reasonably possible that no person (whether having a legal interest in the Property or any part thereof or not) shall use any part of the Airport in a way which would be a breach of the terms of this Agreement.
16 August 2000
IN WITNESS whereof the Parties have executed this Agreement as a Deed in the manner hereinafter appearing THE COMMON SEAL of THANET ) DISTRICT COUNCIL was hereunto affixed in the presence of: ) )
EXECUTED AS A DEED by KENT INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT plc acting by:
) ) )
- 10 -
16 August 2000
- 11 -
16 August 2000
Appendix A2 Planestation’s Proposals re: Night Flying Policy
KENT INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT – MANSTON NIGHT-FLYING POLICY
Introduction This night time flying policy is agreed between the Airport Owner and Thanet District Council (the Planning Authority) within the framework of the Section 106 Agreement already in existence between the two parties and extended by mutual agreement pending public engagement and negotiation of a successor agreement.
The Second Schedule of the existing Section 106 Agreement, paragraph 1.2, requires that the Owner will prepare the night-flying policy at least six months before the commencing of any regular night flying operators after consulting with the Council in accordance with processes set out in 1.3 of the schedule. On an exceptional basis it has not been possible to comply with this requirement. But this exception cannot be taken as an indication that any further applications from the airport owner will be either considered, or accepted.
From January 2005 onward, the Section 106 Agreement between the Owner and the Council will be the subject of public engagement. This night flying policy, being set within the Agreement, will be subject to consultation during that period of public engagement.
Purpose of the Night-Flying Policy The policy recognises the business need for the Owner to be permitted to land seven passenger aircraft per week between the hours of 2300 and 2400 hours, and four passenger aircraft per week between the hours of 2400 and 0100 hours.
Adverse environmental impact, in particular noise, will be reduced, controlled and monitored via the content of this policy.
Period of Policy
C:\Documents and Settings\Peter Forbes\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.IE5\6JYLAZOX\KIANighttime Policy.doc
The policy will apply only, for the period between 1 April and 30 September 2005.
Aircraft Type, and Timetable The scheduled flights listed at Schedule 1 from the Summer 2005 Timetable, will be the only night time flights permitted within the terms of this policy.
Only passenger aircraft of Quota Count (QC) 0.5, from within the EU jet fleet will be permitted to land during night time hours within the terms of this policy.
No substitute aircraft, whether scheduled or not, may land within the night time period unless previously agreed with the Planning Authority. And any substitute aircraft will only be permitted with a QC Count of 0.5 or less.
Any scheduled night time passenger flights arriving more than 30 minutes later than scheduled will be reported in accordance with Section 6 of the policy.
Landing Direction and Route All 11 night time passenger arrival flights must land from the west ie runway 28. It is anticipated by the Council that during the summer months Any meteorological conditions will be such that this can be achieved. and reported in accordance with Section 6 of the policy. Section 106 Agreement.
exceptions will be for aviation and safety reasons and these must be recorded Night time passenger flights arriving will adhere to routes as set out in the existing
Monitoring and Penalties Any aircraft landing from the east, will be reported, in a format to be agreed, to the Council within one working day. Comprehensive detail, including backup data on weather conditions, aviation factors etc will be reported.
C:\Documents and Settings\Peter Forbes\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.IE5\6JYLAZOX\KIANighttime Policy.doc
Any night time passenger arrivals, arriving more than 30 minutes outside schedule, will be reported, in a format to be agreed, to the Council within one working day – along with reasons for late arrival.
Any passenger flights, not scheduled, and included within the schedule attached to this policy, regardless of Quota Count, will be subject to fine on the scale attached to the existing Section 106 Agreement between the Owner and Council.
A monitoring programme will be designed, implemented and reported – conducted by the Owner but in liaison with the Council. The programme, having regard to the significance of night time flying will include appropriate monitoring within residential properties and will as appropriate cross reference to the existing Dwelling Insulation Scheme.
Such noise monitoring reports obtained from implementation of 6.4 above will be carried forward and included in the comprehensive approach to the Environmental Statement in the successive Section 106 Agreement.
Schedule 1 From Planestation
C:\Documents and Settings\Peter Forbes\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.IE5\6JYLAZOX\KIANighttime Policy.doc
Appendix B1 KIA 57-72 dBA Leq 16 hour contours – 1996
Appendix B2 KIA 54-72 dBA Leq 16 hour contours Summer 2000
Appendix B3 KIA 54-72 dBA Leq 16 hour contours Summer 2001
Appendix B4 KIA 54-72 dBA Leq 16 hour contours Annual Period – 26/9/00 to 26/09/01
Appendix A5 KIA 54-72 dBA Leq 16 hour contours Summer 2005
Delta House 175-177 Borough High Street London SE1 1HR Tel: 020 7939 9938 Fax: 020 7939 9901 Email: firstname.lastname@example.org Web: www.alanstratford.co.uk