Brian Lear Thanet District Council
Paul Martin Thanet District Council

1.1 For absence had been received from: 
Trevor Herron TDC; Pete Binding MAG (Jocelyn McCarthy alternate); Bob Weaver Cliffsend Residents (Vera Hovenden alternate); Stephen Sadler SEEDA;

2.1 The Minutes of the meeting held on 27^th June, having previously been circulated, were accepted and signed by the Chairman as a true record.

3.1 Noise Abatement Routes: 
Trevor Herron reported that finalisation of the agreement was still awaiting the advice of lawyers. Alastair Robertson confirmed that meanwhile the route was in operation, awaiting CAA sanction.

3.2 ILS Beam: 
Alastair Robertson reported that flight trials were currently in progress and it was hoped to have the equipment commissioned and in operation by early October.0

3.3 Minutes item 5.2.1 
Complaints regarding helicopter flights should be directed to Heli-Charters 01843 822555 (Gary Slater).

4.1 Building works progress: 
Paul Tipple reported completion of the work on the new taxiway, apron. Work on the Airport lighting system was progressing. 

4.2 Business and other Developments:

4.2.1Tony Freudmann reported that intense discussions with two well-known airlines were ongoing regarding regular scheduled passenger flights to Europe from March 2003. An announcement would be made soon, but until agreement had been finalised, details could not be given. Mr Freudmann felt that Manston’s potential had finally been recognized by more than one airline.

4.2.2 Greater terminal capacity was needed urgently. Currently, Manston could handle one plane-load of 120 passengers every 90 minutes. As airline operators grouped flights together (e.g. 8am, 8.30am, 9am) this would clearly involve a far greater number of passengers than the terminal could handle at present. Now that demand had been established, quick response was needed. Initially this would involve alterations and extensions to existing facilities, plans for which would be published and submitted through the required planning procedures as soon as possible.

4.2.3 Mr Freudmann said that with the infrastructure work now completed, cargo traffic looked likely to increase, to satisfy the all year round demand from UK supermarkets for fresh fruit and vegetables from (primarily) Africa, and some Middle Eastern countries. Manston had created a reputation for the quick turn-round essential for this market.

4.2.4 As a consequence the Airport would get busier, probably by 10,15 or 20 movements per day, mixed between passenger and cargo flights, all during daytime hours. Mr Freudmann pointed out that 737 passenger aircraft were considerably less noisy than large cargo freighters.

4.2.5 Mr Freudmann hoped that by the next MACC meeting, announcements would have been made and details of scheduling and timetabling would be available.

4.2.6 Tony Gould, on behalf of the Trade Union movement, had been encouraged by Mr Freudmann’s statement regarding passenger flights. He asked if there was any projection on the number of extra jobs that might be created. Mr Freudmann said new jobs in the terminal including security and baggage handling would be created and recruited locally. He could not project the number but hoped to be more precise by the next meeting when the number of flights would be known.

5.1 Alastair Robertson gave a resume of the figures which showed a comparison with the same quarter last year

5.2 Complaints: . A total of 496 complaints received June – August 2002 compared with 827 for the same quarter in 2001.

5.2.1 The incident attracting the highest number of complaints (13) had been the MK Airlines arrival on 5^th July in poor visibility. Extensive enquiries (details attached) found that when the approach had begun the weather was above the minimum required for the aircraft captain to continue descent. The weather had deteriorated quickly during the latter stages of approach and at 390ft above aerodrome elevation the captain had decided to divert to Gatwick. Mr Robertson said there was no doubt that air traffic controllers and the aircraft captain had discharged their responsibilities in full and the flight had posed no risk to residents. However, it was fully accepted that the sudden appearance of a large aircraft accompanied by the sound of engines powering up for a missed approach had caused alarm in a neighbourhood not normally subject to aircraft activity. Both the airline and the airport apologised for the concern and disturbance caused by the incident.

5.2.2.1 Barry Coppock, councillor for Newington (the area over which the incident occurred), whilst grateful for the explanation, would have welcomed a shorter explanation soon after the incident. Alastair Robertson pointed out that the information had been passed to each individual complainant as soon as it had become available towards the end of July, as well as to Dr Steve Ladyman MP.

5.2.3 John Bragg enquired about an alleged incident over Deal on 13^th August that had been the subject of continued correspondence in the local press in that area. It had appeared that two large aircraft had flown in close proximity. The volume of correspondence in the Deal newspapers had only been brought to Alastair Robertson’s attention within the last few days. One witness had telephoned the airport, but not subsequently returned a complaints form. However, having received details from a second witness, the incident was now under investigation. Air Traffic Control tapes did not confirm eye witness reports that the aircraft were flying over Deal at 400ft, nor that they missed (each other) by 50ft. Information currently available showed that at all times there had been minimum separation of 2,000ft.

5.2.4 The Chairman noted that there had been no complaints received concerning training flights. Mr Robertson said less training flights were carried out during the summer.

5.2.5 Nicholas Cole noted that the number of complaints concerning off-route flying had increased since last year, bearing out complaints from residents that aircraft were still overflying the villages. Mr Robertson agreed to look into this matter again. ACTION AR

5.3 Runway Utilisation: Figures showed 68.2% of heavy movements utilising Runway 28, and 31.8% Runway 10 – close to the desired split of 70-30%.

5.4 Sec 106 Compliancy: Figures showed an overall trend of improvement over the previous year. There had been 20 movements during 0700 and 2300hrs, mostly light aircraft working for HM Coastguard.

5.5 John Bragg asked whether additional airport activity was expected with the Open Golf Championship in Sandwich next July. Mr Robertson confirmed that additional business was anticipated in the form of light jet aircraft and about 40-50 were expected.

5.6 The Chairman had been informed by TDC that a second amount of £1,000 had been deposited in the Trust Fund. Mr Robertson said this related to an arrival, in spring, of a cargo of fish from Africa, part of which had been designated for Manston, part for the continent. The ongoing cargo had not been ready for departure until 11.30pm and was given permission to do so on payment of £1,000.

5.7 In response to Nicholas Cole, Mr Robertson reported that export cargo tonnage was marginally down in comparison with the same period in the previous year.

6.1 Green Travel Strategy: (tabled – copy attached)

6.1.1 It was reported that Thanet District Council had formally accepted the GTS after concerns previously expressed had been adopted.

6.1.2 Paul Tipple said the Strategy would be published on Wiggins website and that feedback would be welcomed. The Strategy set some challenging targets on reducing single vehicle occupancy and attempting to persuade people to use public transport. Responsibility was put on Wiggins to work closely with local authorities and other major employers to try and improve provision of public transport services both by road and rail.

6.1.3 As the Airport grew, particularly with HGV traffic servicing the airport, there was need to form a freight quality partnership which aims to minimise the impact of road freight traffic particularly in areas close to the airport.

6.1.4 The Chairman suggested the item be on the Agenda for the next meeting for discussion once members had had the opportunity to study the Strategy in detail.

6.1.5 Tony Gould (TGWU) asked whether detailed discussion had taken place regarding development of local bus services at times to suit the needs of employees travelling to work. Paul Tipple confirmed that such details were currently being worked on, in conjunction with the Traffic Impact Assessment and should be completed within the next six months.

6.1.6 Cllr Coppock wished to point out that TDC employed a full time Transport Officer and arrangements had been made with local bus services for transport to be arranged to suit employees. There was provision in the document for an Airport Transport Forum which confirmed that this was an ongoing strategy. Bearing in mind the expected passenger services commencing in March 2003, Cllr Coppock hoped for early results.

6.2 Noise Monitoring: (see attached)

6.2.1 Paul Tipple reported that a robust noise monitoring strategy would result from work undertaken by Manchester Airport plc and Bickerdike Allen, together with LMA and TDC. This work would rely heavily on noise monitoring data and forecast noise contours.

6.2.1.1 The strategy would provide the methodology of monitoring aircraft noise, future noise projections, the relationship between monitored noise and the noise contours, the significance or otherwise of daytime peak noise events. It would also look at measures for minimising landing/departure noise, and the effects of present and future landing noise over Ramsgate. It would provide an assessment of aircraft departure routes and runway usage, and address noise from ground operations. In the light of all the above, the strategy would formulate appropriate mitigation and operational controls.

6.2.1.2 Mr Tipple hoped to be able to make a formal presentation of the strategy by the December meeting.

6.2.2 The results of two months’ monitoring up to end July were tabled.

6.2.3 Planning approval had been received to site the Western monitor in the car park at St Nicholas. The consultants responsible for installing the monitor required three weeks in which to do so.

6.2.4 A compromise had been reached regarding the siting of the permanent Eastern monitor on the roof of Clarendon School, following the headmistress’s objection to the taller, permanent fixing pole next to the flagpole. The shorter pole carried a risk of reflected noise from the adjacent wall, and a form of calibration to ensure the accuracy of the readings had been instigated.

6.2.5 This would release the mobile monitor for use elsewhere. A draft Protocol for use of this mobile monitoring station had been produced in conjunction with TDC, and would be submitted to MACC for discussion.

3.2.6 Mr Tipple explained that the 63dB noise contour was essentially the basis on which the airport authority, in conjunction with local planning authorities, could determine how to progress issues such as a sound insulation scheme. Under the terms of the Section 106 Agreement, Wiggins were obliged to provide, by 26^th September 2002, a detailed sound insulation scheme for those dwellings within the 63dB sound contour. Noise monitor readings taken at Clarendon School confirmed that the original noise contour had been validated. It was slightly larger than before and was based on the full extent of traffic from September 2000 – September 2001. The reason for the slight increase had been caused by more than expected use of Illyushin and DC8 aircraft.

6.2.7 Nicholas Cole asked why, when heavy traffic movements had decreased during the period, the average noise levels had increased. Mr Tipple said that some flights had caused greater disturbance than other inbound flights by exactly the same type of aircraft. These occurrences were being investigated with the airline operators concerned, in an effort to bring noise levels down again.

6.3 Noise Insulation Scheme: Paul Tipple had been surprised to learn that airports with a similar level of air traffic as that currently at Manston did not provide sound insulation schemes.

6.3.1 Noise insulation included secondary double glazing, ventilation, and window blinds for up to five rooms in each qualifying residence.

6.3.2 The scope of the scheme was for Wiggins to provide a grant of 80% of up to £2,000 (including VAT) towards the cost of the above.

6.3.3 Properties within the present boundary included the North West quadrant of Cliffsend and one or two additional properties between the Airport and Manston Village, including Poucy Cottages.

6.3.4 The Airport would take sole control of the administration of the scheme. A single contractor would, as a result of competition, be appointed to carry out installation.

6.3.5 Once TDC had had the opportunity to consider the scheme, the process would be for all eligible houseowners to make a formal application. Prompt consideration would be given.

6.3.6 In response to Vera Hovenden (Cliffsend Residents Assn), Mr Tipple confirmed that the proposal was that the Airport would contribute a maximum of 80% of £2,000 (i.e. £1,600) towards the total cost of installation. He further confirmed that the date of 26^th September was that by which the formal scheme would be submitted to Thanet District Council. Mr Tipple was happy to accept Mrs Hovenden’s invitation to meet with Cliffsend Residents in the near future.

6.3.7 The Chairman wondered how the scheme would be publicised without undue cost. Mr Tipple said a brochure would be placed in public libraries and the scheme would be published on the company website.

6.3.8 Kelvin Holdom asked whether maps showing the scheme boundaries could be made available, as many residents of Minster would be interested. Paul Tipple agreed. ACTION PT

6.4 Pollution monitoring: (see attached) Paul Martin said the figures showed that levels were well within Government maximums.

6.4.1 Dennis Hart asked whether the strong smell experienced at times in High Street Manston was harmful. Paul Martin said that it was caused by aviation fuel, but whilst agreeing that the smell was strong, monitoring showed no harmful level. A monitoring station had been established, in partnership with the Airport, to analyse the air for all trace elements. Results would be reported to MACC in the near future.

6.4.2 Current pollution levels around the Airport were far lower than those in Thanet town centres.

6.5 Surface Access – Traffic Impact Assessment: Paul Tipple reported that traffic flow measuring undertaken had established a baseline of traffic movements in Thanet. Potential local, short-lived congestion problems over the next 4-5 years had been identified. The consultants believed that as part of the sustainable development of the Airport, the road system appeared to be sufficient to cope with the projected flow. The required enhancements to roads in the immediate vicinity of the Airport were now being studied. Babtie, the consultants, were undertaking this work independently of the Airport, and in conjunction with TDC.

6.5.1 One of the factors being taken into account was improvement of the rail network. Mr Tipple said there had been a great deal of speculation as to how the Airport would eventually connect to the rail network, thereby standing a chance of extending the catchment area for passenger traffic, and reducing the number of car movements in and out of the Airport.

6.5.1.1 In conjunction with the work being undertaken by the East Kent Area Strategic Partnership (TDC, Canterbury CC, Dover Harbour Board, Manston, Pfizer, KCC, SEEDA and others) Wiggins had commissioned consultants to identify the potential for a fast through service from London to Manston and on into Ramsgate. Results showed that the provision of CTRL domestic services as provided for by Government policy, with enhancements to the Ashford to Ramsgate line, would actually provide over time an overall journey from London to Ramsgate of 1hr. Mr Tipple said this had been demonstrated by engineers, and would involve signalling improvements and line straightening on certain stretches. This was a better option than utilising the North Kent line, which was subject to a number of permanent speed restrictions.

6.5.1.2 A new Manston Parkway station had been suggested as the connection to Manston, utilising the stretch of line where there was a disused railway bridge between Cliffsend and the Lord of the Manor. That stretch had been identified as able to provide platform capacity that could easily be brought up to ground level. This project needed to be researched in more depth. Provision of a Manston Parkway station would ease congestion around the Airport and the villages of Minster and Manston.

6.5.1.3 John Bragg repeated his previous doubts as to the feasibility of the plan due to the existence of 9 level crossings between Ashford and Ramsgate, three of which were in the centre of Canterbury. Leigh Herington said that public rights of way on the Stour line were also a significant problem, and that Connex were currently looking at the possibility of closure of some of these.

6.5.1.4 Vera Hovenden asked about the projected timescale, and Paul Tipple said that on the premise that CTRL would be operational by 2006, the East Kent Partnership, with the Government, were working towards the position where the necessary improvements to the Ashford/Ramsgate line could be made to coincide with the introduction of CTRL services, plus the domestic services, i.e. 2007/2008.

6.5.1.5 Ron Flaherty asked how it was proposed to get the expected passengers to Manston in the meantime. Paul Tipple said until the expected passenger business was finalised, it was difficult to project the number of people involved. There were a number of options, including a bus service from Herne Bay to the Airport, providing the shortest possible journey time from London at the present time.

7.1 The Chairman stated that the amount of £2,000 was accruing interest in a TDC bank account. The Committee had agreed that, in accordance with airport best practices, this money should be used to assist community projects in the neighbourhood of the Airport. Priority would be given to projects with environmental connotations, and to communities which suffer some disturbance from airport activities, e.g. those immediately adjacent to the Airport of under the flight path. Following discussion, the following points were agreed:

7.1.1 The fund be known as the Airport Community Fund.

7.1.2 Sub committee membership to comprise: Sir Alistair Hunter as Chairman,Tessa Sherriff as Secretary, Nicholas Cole (Monkton PC), John Garland (Birchington PC), Cllr Dennis Hart (Ramsgate), Paul Tipple (Wiggins group), an officer of TDC (to be nominated by Cllr Nicholson, Leader), and a representative of Kent Assn. of Parish Councils Canterbury branch (to be notified).

7.1.3 First bids be submitted by end December 2002 with a view to awards being made during January.

7.1.4 Community representatives and other members publicise the scheme by word of mouth, as press advertising would consume the majority of the funds available.

7.2 It was further agreed that the sub-committee should:

7.2.1 Consider bids for donations every six months, provided there was at least £1000 available to disburse

7.2.2 Make donations of not more than £500 to any single project

7.2.3 Use its discretion in deciding the level of matching funding for any single donation

7.2.4 Give priority to projects with an environmental connotation, and in communities adjacent to, or under the flight path of, the Airport

7.2.5 Report to the main committee as required, but at least once a year.

8.1 The Chairman said that the Report required comments to be made by 30^th November 2002. A number of organisations represented on MACC would be preparing comments, including TDC who had offered to pass its report to MACC as a basis for discussion.

8.2 Despite the Chairman’s suggestion that it was not within the remit of MACC to submit comment on the Report, discussion followed by a show of hands revealed a majority in favour of a submission from the Committee.

8.3 It was decided that a special meeting to discuss the Report in more detail be held during November, the date to be advised.

10. Any other Business: There being no further business, the meeting closed at 9.50pm.

MIN 9/02

Letter (11th Sept)      Letter (7th Oct)    Statistics  Mobile Noise Montitoring

KIACC INDEX