|
MANSTON AIRPORT CONSUL TATIVE COMMITTEE MINUTES of the MEETING held on 3 October 2001 7.00pm at MANSTON AIRPORT
IN ATTENDANCE: Trevor Herron Thanet District Council The Chairman welcomed members of the public attending as observers, and Kelvin Holdom representing Minster Parish Council following the death of Judith Singleton. 1.1 Apologies for absence had been received from:
2.1 Minutes of the previous meeting held Sth July, having been previously circulated, were accepted and signed by the Chairman as a true record. 3.1 Item 3.1 of the minutes. The Chairman drew attention to a misunderstanding regarding date of installation of the ILS beam. The date of 16th July was the date of commencement of a works programme that would include the installation. Alastair Robertson would advise on progress under Agenda Item 4. 3.1.1 Cllr Flaherty asked for clarification as to whether using ILS could be made mandatory over Herne Bay and Ramsgate, rather then being left to the discretion of the pilot. Alastair Robertson said that the issue of mandatory ILS approaches to Runways 28 and 10 was within the gift of the airport and was a requirement that would be imposed on arriving aircraft on both runways. Exceptions would occur were the ILS installation unserviceable or in the event of crew training requiring visual approach. 3.2 Item 7 of the minutes. TDC had advised the secretariat that Planning Approval had been granted for the construction of Paint Spray Hangar and Aircraft Stand, with extraction flues now to be 40m high. 3.3 Other matters arising from the July Minutes would be dealt with under subsequent items on the Agenda. 4.1 Operational Statistics. Alastair Robertson apologised for having been unable to provide these for circulation before the meeting. Manpower resources had been stretched following events in the USA on 11th September. 4.1.1 Sec 106 Compliancy. All night movements (June 15, July 3, August 16) had been by light aircraft, based at Manston and operated by Air Atlantique for HM Coastguard. This airborne patrol was scrambled only when there was a requirement to locate, for example, oil spillage or breach of maritime regulations. There was also a requirement for night training in order to retain the CM licence. There had been one late engine testing run that had not been completed in time for the aircraft to depart until the following morning. 4.1.2 Runway Utilisation. For the benefit of members of the public, it was explained that on Runway 28 aircraft approached over Ramsgate and departed towards Herne Bay. On Runway 10, aircraft approached over Herne Bay and departed over Ramsgate. Percentages aimed for were Runway 28 70%, and Runway 10 30%. It would be noted from the figures that it would be difficult to achieve these aims for the current year, due to unusual weather conditions and wind direction. 4.1.3 Cargo Tonnage. Mr Robertson said there would be an increase in cargo traffic for the remainder of the current year. A large proportion of cargo business was the import of fresh fruit and vegetables from Africa. The last quarter of the year was always the busiest and supplies for supermarkets for the run up to Christmas would result in October, November and December being very busy. From 20th December there would be later flights departing from Manston and, although not beyond 2300hrs, considerably more between 2200 and 2300hrs than would normally be expected. 4.1.4 Passenger throughput figures showed a slight increase over last year. At least one complete rotation had been lost due to events on 11th September. Overall figures were slightly lower than had been anticipated, with a decrease in the number of cruise passengers on flights. 4.2.1 Virgin Training Flight 27'h May. Revised figures showed the total number of complaints received relating to this flight. 4.2.2 Other Complaints. Alastair Robertson said that although training flights had given rise to a number of complaints, these were generally about noise or pollution and were registered under these headings. The nil returns for complaints about "training flights" simply meant that no-one had complained about training as such. (see also 4.2.8.1 ). 4.2.3 Regarding the Top Ten incidents generating complaints, it was no surprise that most concerned MK Airlines aircraft, as 90-95% of LMA business came from MK. 4.2.4 Nicholas Cole asked for a comparison with last year's statistics in order to ascertain whether or not there had been any improvement. What was being done to reduce the number of complaints? Alastair Robertson agreed to provide figures for circulation with these minutes. Action: AR 4.2.5 Ron Flaherty noted an increase in the number of complaints from Herne Bay and Whitstable. The electorate was asking what was being done? Was the only answer Cllr Flaherty could give that the ILS beam should alleviate the problem by enabling aircraft to fly at a greater height? Alastair Robertson said although the ILS beam would help it would not provide the total answer. ~unway use was dictated by surface wind. There was no such thing as a silent airport and a balance had to be struck between the benefit of having an airport and the inconvenience associated with it. 4.2.6 Nicholas Cole noted that for the second time running, it had been a training flight that had generated the greatest number of complaints. Was it because (some) trainee pilots had not been briefed as to the fiightpaths they should be following? It was clear that training flights did not follow the same fiightpaths as aircraft that use the airport regularly. Alastair Robertson stated that as far as it was possible to ascertain, the aircraft that train at Manston did fly in accordance with established training procedures. It was always made clear to Airline Training Officers that all training flights must adhere to these procedures, or be refused permission on future occasions. In response to John Garland, Mr Robertson confirmed that at least one airline's request had been declined. 4.2.7 Responding to John Bragg, Mr Robertson confirmed that, immediately following terrorist incidents against America, there had been major re-structuring of flightpaths. This explained the aircraft noise which some residents had heard at night during this period. The movements were nothing to do with LMA. 4.2.8 Mr Robertson reported that at a meeting on 4th September between TDC and the Airport, chaired by Sir Alistair Hunter, ways of improving the complaints system and presentation of complaints statistics had been discussed. 4.2.8.1 It had been suggested that categories of Causal Factors should be amended to: Noise, Air Pollution, Low Flying, Repeated Approaches, Off- route Aircraft, Others. Were there no objection, this presentation would commence as from the current quarter. 4.2.8.2 Registering a complaint by telephone, to a "live" operator, rather than by completion of a form was also under consideration. This had been thought to be more user-friendly, and response could be quicker and more accurate. LMA had in the past experienced abusive telephone complaints and this was unacceptable. 4.2.8.3 A quarterly forum comprising representatives of TDC, Airline Operators, MACC, and LMA had been suggested. 4.2.8.4 It had also been brought to Mr Robertson's attention that whilst statistics on runway use were including all aircraft movements, the Sec 106 Agreement required numbers of departures only to be used, these being usually the noisier of the two. It was hoped to circulate with these minutes a breakdown of departing aircraft. Action: AR 4.2.8.5 The Chairman hoped that the Committee would agree that the above points represented modest improvements on presentation and operation of complaints procedures. Did the Committee endorse the inauguration of a quarterly forum which would report back to MACC? 4.2.8.6 Ron Flaherty said that if the Complaints Procedures were to be changed, people needed to be informed of those changes. He had not been aware of the September 4th meeting. Who was to inform the electorate in Herne Bay and Whitstable of these changes? 4.2.8.7 Nicholas Cole asked during what hours the line would be manned. Mr Robertson, in answer to both him and Cllr Flaherty, explained that there was a good deal of internal discussion required before such a change could be made, but hours of operation would be clearly stated in any announcement of changes to the system. 4.2.8.8 Andrew Baker asked whether the Airport had a website. Would there be any merit in having a complaints facility on such a site? Alastair Robertson said a website was currently being developed. He would enquire as to whether a complaints facility could be included. 4.3 Noise & Pollution Monitoring 4.3.1 Trevor Herron (TDC) reminded the meeting that planning consent had been given for two permanent noise monitoring sites; one to the west of the runway, between Monkton and Minster roundabouts, which was not yet in place due to last minute discussions with the farmer regarding exact location. Planning consent had been granted for the second monitor, on the roof of Clarendon School, but this was not yet in place. However the mobile monitor was temporarily operating on this site. It was hoped that agreement would be reached with the relevant farmer, enabling both units to be in place in November, making the mobile unit available for use in various sensitive areas. Readings would go to the Manchester Airport consultants, who would forward results to TDC, LMA and MACC. A meeting was due to take place between TDC and the Manchester consultants at the end of October, at which the format of published results would be decided. 4.3.2 Results of air pollution monitoring had previously been circulated. These showed extremely low levels of benzene. Levels of nitrous oxide were to be induded in future readings. Separate, more sophisticated equipment was to be installed in Ramsgate, under the fiightpath. It was hoped that this would yield results by the end of November. 4.3.3 Mr Herron confirmed to the Chairman that by the time of the next MACC meeting, more sophisticated readings on pollution would be available, with possibly the first noise readings. 4.4.1 Trevor Herron said the most important current issue was the Environmental Impact Statement. Members would have seen the press statement from Thanet District Council regarding an extension to the date for submission until 1 dh October. TDC had been working closely with the consultants and Wiggins and everybody was satisfied with th';! work being undertaken. A steering committee had been set up including representatives from Kent County Council and the Environment Agency. To date, English Nature and SEEDA had been unable to attend. Work was well underway, and it was expected that by 10th October the Statement would be delivered to TDC and thereafter there would be a consultation process. 4.4.2 The Green Travel Strategy had still not been received from Wiggins. (For Mr Tipple's reply, see 5.3) 4.4.3 The Chairman commented that the Supplementary Agreement to the Section 106 that had been hoped for earlier in the year appeared still not to have been signed. Trevor Herron confirmed the Chairman's assumption that, as this had not yet been completed, there could be no breaches of its terms -i.e. operation of training sessions, and deviation from noise abatement routes. Agreement had been delayed by further additions by the Airport operators. It was hoped that, within the next few days, the Committee would receive details for approval. The Chairman suggested that this be circulated with the minutes with an invitation for Members to comment. Alastair Robertson briefly outlined the suggested amendments to noise abatement routes, which had been made to increase the height of flying over Herne Bay. 4.4.3.1 Martin Tapp requested that the information provided to members included a map. This was agreed. Mr Robertson confirmed to Cllr Flaherty that maps previously circulated were no longer relevant. 4.4.3.2 Nicholas Cole, whilst happy for the residents of Herne Bay and Whitstable, asked whether it would be possible to turn right earlier than 1.5 miles out, to avoid aircraft drifting over the village of Monkton. Alastair Robertson said that doing so would cause aircraft to fly over Acol and Birchington, and that aircraft were fixed on course and should not drift, towards Monkton. John Garland added that whilst the accuracy of an aircraft might be to 10ft, the accuracy of the pilot could not be so -an aircraft did not turn like a car -it could take another half mile, thereby explaining the drift. The Chairman asked that Nicholas Cole report to the next meeting on Monkton's experience of overflights. 5.1 Airport Security -Alastair Robertson, having taken advice from the Department of Transport, read out a general statement regarding increased security arrangements in place following 11th September. 5.2.1 Paul Tipple, responsible for Airport Strategy for the Wiggins Group, addressed some of the concerns raised by community groups in an open letter under Item 6 on the Agenda. A considerable amount of work had, over the previous nine months, gone into establishing Manston's market potential resulting in detailed analysis and reports by Arthur D Little and the Wiggins Group. Members had asked when there would be a clear statement of environmental and operational strategy. Mr Tipple was pleased to report that this would be provided in the Environmental Statement, and would include air traffic movements, additional taxiways and apron space, creation of job opportunities and distribution of freight. 5.2.2 Wiggins were working extremely closely with all statutory players. A steering group on which both KCC and TDC were represented had been set up under his chairmanship. There was a need to coordinate with TDC and KCC structure plans so that airport development could evolve in a timely fashion with the work of the planning authorities. It was not only Wiggins who were identifying issues. 5.2.3 Wiggins had conducted its own analysis on the effects of 11th September on work at Manston and found no reason to lessen the pace. Contrary to a report on BBC television that plans for Manston had been shelved or put on nold, Mr Tipple assured everybody that plans were going ahead. This view had been reinforced since 11 th September in negotiations with a major international freight distributor looking to introduce sizeable quantities of perishable cargo through Manston and change the location of its UK operations to Manston, involving, it was hoped, the creation of warehousing facilities providing new jobs for local people. Mr Tipple hoped to be able to report further at the next MACC meeting. 5.2.4 Work on completing new taxiways and aprons was on schedule putting LMA in a good position to ensure sustainable development when attracting new airline operators. 5.2.5 Difficulties delaying the installation of the ILS system had all been due to positioning of the glidepath. In response to concerns expressed by the committee, Mr Tipple reported the appointment of Aviation Services pic to install a localiser system to specify inbound track for the airport, which together with existing equipment, would guarantee level flight at specified height particularly over Herne Bay -approximately 2,50Oft on approach to Runway 10. It was hoped the complete system would be working by next Spring. Once the localiser was installed, feasibility studies would be conducted to establish a permanent site for the equipment. Ron Flaherty said Canterbury City Council appreciated the effort Wiggins were putting into getting the ILS beam installed. 5.3 The Environmental Statement due to be formally submitted to TDC on 10th October would show how the developers were taking forward their commitment to sustainable development, whilst maintaining a balance between the business needs of the airport with the environmental regulations imposed upon them. The ES would cover a whole range of issues including noise and air pollution through a Traffic Impact Assessment identifying key issues associated with surface access to the airport. The next step would be the Green Travel Plan based on a formal traffic impact assessment on which a scoping opinion had been requested from KCC to ensure that the work required dovetailed with TDC and the region as a whole. Mr Tipple was acutely aware of not meeting the requirements of the Section 106 Agreement by submitting the Green Travel Plan by the set date. The aim was for a 10% reduction in the number of people driving to/from the airport in single occupancy vehicles, rising to 15% by road access. New bus routes, dedicated employee buses and cycle tracks were under consideration. 5.3.1 Whilst gratified to hear of the production of the Environmental Statement, John Garland asked for confirmation that this would form only the baseline, jeaving a great deal of work to be done in order to produce a total Environmental Impact Assessment. Paul Tipple said the ES was in two parts. The first covered what the airport had on site at the moment, detail of how the development plan would look if it gained necessary approval downstream. The second part assessed the likely environmental impact of each of those particular developments on the population and the area in which they live. Having identified this, the ES would quantify what environmental controls were already in place through health and safety regulations and more generally established airport procedures concerning management of potential risk. The end result would be a professional assessment of the likely environmental impact. Broadly speaking, it would provide a baseline against which Local Authorities could judge future planning applications. 5.3.2 Leigh Herington confirmed that KCC was very much engaged with the Airport and TDC in the work for the Environmental Impact Assessment, particularly with pollution monitoring in the area. Constructive work had been done in the assessment of forecasts of movements of passengers and cargo which had provided sufficient detail to enable KCC to work jointly with the Traffic Impact Assessment. 5.3.3 Martin Tapp felt members should have had more time to consider the Scoping Opinion, which members had received only ten days before the final result came out. He hoped that when the results were finalised they would be circulated to members promptly, without waiting for a MACC meeting. As a layman, Cllr Tapp did not know the difference between a Scoping Opinion and a full Environmental Assessment. He would need to take professional advice to ascertain whether anything was missing, and was sorry that it was not a full Environmental Impact Assessment. 5.3.4 The effect of noise on schools and the education of children should, Cllr Tapp continued, be addressed. There was a substantial time lag when children's attention was lost as an aircraft flew over. 5.3.5 Trevor Herron explained that the Scoping Opinion was a list of matters that the Environmental Statement should address. The ES itself would be a very substantial document. The Scoping Opinion had been drawn up in consultation with English Nature, the Environment Agency and KCC, There was no specific requirement regarding schools, but this would be covered by general noise profiles being drawn up by the consultants. 5.3.6 Martin Tapp, whilst impressed by the number of people consulted, was disappointed that MACC had not been included. 5.3.7 Trevor Herron said that the consultation period for the Environmental Statement had not yet been discussed but was likely to be not less than eight weeks, as with the Master Plan, when copies had been placed in libraries, and announcements in local press stating that copies were available. The ES would be accompanied by a non- technical summary highlighting the main issues. 5.3.8 In response to the Chairman, Mr Herron confirmed that it was the intention that MACC would be forwarded one full copy plus a number of non-technical summaries as soon as possible at the start of the consultation period. TDC would then invite the public to comment. The Chairman thought MACC members should comment to TDC, with a copy to the secretariat, and the next MACC meeting would be arranged for a date just before the end of the consultation period, providing an opportunity for open discussion. The Environmental Statement was as important a document as any considered by the Committee, and it was important that members had every opportunity to consider and discuss it fully. 5.3.9 At the request of members, Paul Tipple agreed to organise publication of the ES on the Wiggins website. Action: PT 6 CONCERNS OF COMMUNITY REPRESENTATIVES 6.1 A paper had been previously circulated reflecting the feelings and thoughts of representatives of the communities on the periphery of the airport. John Garland thanked Paul Tipple for his presentation which had given community representatives more confidence that the matters raised were being addressed in a complete way, but this had not been evident over the last two years. 6.2 John Garland still wished to make the point that the villages felt that managing an airport was not quite the same as managing a property development outfit. Wiggins had failed woefully in meeting the targets set by the Melrose Report which Wiggins had quite happily taken on board and accepted at the time. Responsible operational companies required a different mindset regarding managing health and safety issues -it was not sufficient to just stay within the law or try to wriggle round it. 6.3 Did the company have a system to identify hazards? It was now known that Wiggins were speaking to the right people, but was there an internal system or a company policy? Where was the interest of the Chief Executive -who never attended any more? Did the company have sufficient staff to manage these skills? If someone had been put in place, as the Melrose Report stated, the person had not been made known to the Committee. There should be internal written reviews to ensure that these matters were working properly. Were there emergency procedures that worked? People kept reading in the local newspaper that a very successful operation had been held, but the villages would like a feel for it in this forum. Did it work? Were things changed half way through? 6.4 Cllr Garland stated that all parties to the paper were interested in the success of Manston, but as long as it was not on all their backs. It was hoped that Wiggins would respond in a positive way to the concerns expressed- which they did now seem to be doing.
6.4.2 For KCC, Leigh Herington reassured the community that matters raised in the paper were not only subject to the Environmental Impact Assessment but were also in the Local Authorities' plans, including the Kent Structure Plan. There would be three opportunities for the public to speak on these important issues. 6.4.3 Paul Tipple said that Wiggins was no longer a property development company in developing the Airport, ploughing its own furrow regardless of concerns of the community. It had been recognised that the Airport had to be seen in a wider context. He felt that Wiggins had moved forward on at least acknowledging a community of interests and recognising the impact that aviation has more generally, and the more positive side in attracting investment into the region. 6.4.3.1 Safety was of paramount concern and there were established procedures to ensure appropriate levels of safety both in day to day operations and procedures in construction. The Environment Agency had been involved throughout the process and had praised the work that had been done. It was the intention to go beyond that to identify better "best practices". 6.4.3.2 Lessons had been learned from errors of the past two years and Mr Tipple would like to think that the company was now on course. 6.4.3.3 Mr Tipple felt that the activities of the Committee could be extended to reflect wider interests, so that issues such as those raised by John Garland and other community representatives could be addressed. 6.4.4 The Chairman said that the discussion had shown that in the airport's first years, all of those involved had been learning in the process, including Wiggins, the statutory authorities and the community. There had been mistakes, but it had been graphically illustrated at this meeting that consultation processes were getting better. The Environmental Statement would be a test of how well procedures were being improved for the benefit of all concerned. 6.4.4.1 Regarding the role of the Committee, the Chairman asked members to alert him before meetings to any matters that they thought should be discussed. 7.1 In the light of a recent ruling on night flying at Heathrow, Paul Tipple took the opportunity to confirm to people that as far as Manston Airport was concerned, Wiggins' position remained that they had no plans to introduce night flying. Business objectives over the next 5, 10,15 and 20 years could be met without any recourse whatsoever to night flying. 8.1 The Chairman said it was not appropriate to set a date that evening. He would keep in touch with Wiggins and TDC on the consultation timetable for the ES and aim to set the next meeting at a date shortly before the close of that consultation period, probably early December. In this way the Committee could deal with the document in the way described. The date would be advised with circulation of the Minutes. There being no further business, the meeting closed at 9pm. |