PRESENT:

APOLOGIES Apologies for absence were received from Leigh Herington KCC; John Bragg KCC; Stephen Sadler SEEDA; Martin Robinson KAPC Dover; Mick Denyer Manston PC (Peter Ditton attending as alternate); Dennis Hart Ramsgate (Alan Poole alternate).

1. MINUTES The Minutes of the meeting held on 16^th September 2002, having been previously circulated, were accepted and signed by the Chairman as a true record.

2. MATTERS ARISING

2.1 ILS Beam: In response to Cllr Flaherty, Alastair Robertson reported that installation had been completed. CAA approval was awaited, which should be received within days, and the beam would then become operational.

2.2 Noise Abatement Routes: Trevor Herron reported that finalisation of the agreement was still awaited from lawyers.

2.3.1 Kelvin Holdom asked whether maps showing the boundary of the scheme were yet available. Paul Tipple said that once the scheme had been approved by Thanet District Council, details would be published together with maps. Mr Tipple had a map with him which members were invited to study after the meeting.

2.3.2 Trevor Herron said some issues needed to be cleared before the scheme was put before Council, which he hoped would be by the end of January.

2.3.3 Peter Ditton requested that Paul Tipple make a visit to Manston residents similar to the one undertaken in Cliffsend to give details of the scheme and its boundaries. Mr Tipple said that Manston Village did not fall within the boundary of the scheme. Residents from all areas eligible under the scheme had been invited to the Cliffsend meeting.

2.4 Nicholas Cole was still receiving complaints that aircraft were flying off route over Monkton and other villages. Alastair Robertson confirmed that he would report fully at the next meeting. Action AR

3.1 Tony Freudmann said that interest in Manston had increased over the past year to the extent that passenger airlines were now approaching LMA. He gave an encouraging report concerning negotiations with various passenger carriers. Although disappointed at being unable to make an announcement at the meeting, Mr Freudmann hoped to be able to do so in the very near future.

3.2 Responding to Len Claisse, Mr Freudmann said that uncertainty over the possibility of a new airport at Cliffe had not directly affected negotiations. There was some difficulty in convincing European airlines, many of which were still state owned, that LMA had a long-term future whilst uncertainties concerning Cliffe existed. Low-cost airlines, however, did not take a long-term view. Mr Freudmann said that in order to convince the authorities of the urgent need for a fast rail link to/from London, LMA needed to demonstrate sufficient demand.

3.3 Paul Tipple reported that the Strategic Rail Authority had stated that part of its recommendations had gone to Government and would form the basis of consultation in the next few months. They included a fast link from the CTRL at Ashford to Canterbury, but this was not extended to Ramsgate. Their reason for this had been given as a reflection of the likely traffic flows. Mr Tipple felt however that the SRA had failed to recognise that the additional 15-17miles from Canterbury to Ramsgate was a small price to pay in terms of cost of upgrading the single link and getting round speed restrictions at certain level crossings, given the potential for £200m p.a. economic benefit to East Kent. This was why local authorities were trying to convince ministers of the need to take this final step.

3.4 The Chairman informed the meeting that the Planning Department of TDC had invited the Committee’s comments on a planning application for a new aircraft hangar. At his request, Paul Tipple gave an explanation of the plans concerned. Members of the Committee were invited to read the application after the meeting.

4.1 The Chairman confirmed that following a special meeting on 26^th November, MACC’s response had been forwarded. The fact that the closing date had since been extended, following a judicial review that had decided that Gatwick be included.

4.2 Members decided that no amendments to MACC’s response were necessary in light of the inclusion of Gatwick.

4.3 Wiggins’ response to the consultation was received. Members thought it a good and fair response. Paul Tipple explained that it had been difficult to tack information on to specific questions asked, but agreed with Cllr Coppock that sufficient consideration of the potential of Manston had not been given in the Government Report.

 

4. 5. LMA QUARTERLY STATISTICS – Alastair Robertson

5.1 Complaints: Despite the fact that one individual had made over 100 complaints, the total number for 2002 was far less than the previous year.

5.2 The Chairman noted that there had been no individual incident that had attracted more than 3 complaints, and that there had been fewer training flights than usual.

5.3 Alastair Robertson said that training flights were seasonal. He reported that three incidents, in June, September and November, had each attracted a fine of £1,000.

5.3.1 Ron Flaherty wondered whether a £1,000 was sufficient to deter night flights. Mr Robertson explained that such flights only occurred either when perishable cargo was involved, or technical difficulties had arisen. Such incidents were logged and no regular pattern had emerged.

5.4 Departure figures showed that a higher percentage than desired had utilized Runway 10, due to weather conditions prevailing.

6.1 Green Travel Strategy: Trevor Herron reported that the GTS was in operation and a GTS would be attached to all planning applications. Steve Anderson of MK confirmed that his company had been required to provide one for planning application for a new hangar.

6.2 Noise Monitoring

6.2.1 Jeff Charles of Bickerdike Allen gave a general overview of issues concerning the management of noise at airports. It was hoped that the noise of departing aircraft could be progressively reduced through steeper takeoffs; but the noise of landing aircraft was more difficult to reduce.

6.2.2 A new airport like Manston could not afford monitoring equipment as sophisticated as that in more established airports. Nevertheless, his checklist of measures for controlling and monitoring noise showed that Manston had most of them in place. Exceptions were:

6.2.2.1 Manston did not impose a maximum noise limit for departing aircraft

6.2.2.2 There was no noise budget for the airport

6.2.2.3 Some airports had found a "pilot’s forum" where pilots themselves suggested methods of reducing noise, helped in lowering noise levels. But there was no point in having one until monitors were producing comprehensive, regular and accurate readings.

6.2.3 John Garland asked, in view of the fact that the biggest problem was caused by arrivals over Ramsgate, whether the slidescope could be raised to 5⁰. Mr Charles said this was not possible with the current Manston fleet of older cargo aircraft, but that pressure might be brought to bear in the future.

6.2.3.1 Steve Anderson, MK Airlines, advised that his company was working together with Boeing and Pratt and Whitney on hushkits for Chapter IV aircraft.

6.2.4 In answer to the Chairman, Paul Martin (TDC) stated that the two permanent noise monitoring stations should be sited before Christmas and operational early in the New Year. The mobile monitor would then be available to be managed by TDC in accordance with the agreed protocol.

6.2.5 Members had received the Average Noise Level Report, covering January – November 2002. This showed the average of maximum readings from actual aircraft movements monitored from the roof of Clarendon School, Ramsgate

6.2.5.1 The Chairman remarked that despite the ban on Chapter II aircraft since April, the readings did not appear to be much lower. Paul Martin said that although they were in fact slightly lower, the banning of Chapter II aircraft had not made much difference.

6.2.5.2 Paul Tipple said that the Manston fleet mix included one or two aircraft which, although Chapter III compliant, had engines that created a higher sound level than most. Operators were trying to overcome this, but it would take time.

6.2.6 Paul Martin confirmed . that readings from the Western monitoring station would be available for the next meeting. Action PM

6.2.7 Paul Tipple said that the paper on Noise Monitoring, being prepared by Bickerdike Allen, would be presented at the March meeting. Action PT

6.3  Pollution monitoring:

6.3.1 Paul Martin pointed out that the monitors recorded emissions not only from aircraft, but also traffic, factory and other sources.

6.3.2 Although Nitrogen Dioxide levels for October 2002 had reached double figures, they were still below the Government standard. This was consistent with the rest of Thanet.

6.3.3 Mr Martin said that all Authorities were obliged to carry out regular reviews and TDC would shortly be commencing this.

6.3.4 Sometimes changes in levels were due to weather conditions prevailing, whilst some were seasonal.

7.1 The chairman stated that some seven applications for funding had been received – all of which were being considered, but that no decisions would be made until after the closing date end December 2002.

7.2 There was now £3,000 in the Fund plus interest. None of the applicants had requested a large amount, and it therefore should be possible to grant some amount of funding to all applications considered to be worthwhile and to be consistent with the guidelines of the scheme.

8.1 John Garland had noted from Wiggins Annual Report that a Risk Assessment Committee was being formed within the Group. Had any work been carried out yet on the group’s aviation/airport business? If so, could MACC be informed.

8.1.1  Paul Tipple explained that the new non-executive Chairman, Richard Bernays, was in the process of ensuring that requirements of corporate government were met in full. He would shortly be setting up the risk assessment committee. But its role related to risks in corporate government, not the operational risks of airports.

9.1 Meetings during 2003 would be held on the following dates:

1. March Tuesday 18^th 2pm
2. June Tuesday 24^th 2pm
3. September Tuesday 23^rd / Wednesday 24^th 7.30pm
4. December Tuesday 16^th 2pm

There being no further business, the meeting closed at 4.20pm

MIN.DEC02

KIACC INDEX