PRESENT: Councillors John Lenton (Chairman), George Bathurst, Malcolm Beer, Alan Mellins and Gary Muir.

Regular Attendees: Andrew Davies, Peter Hooper, Jamie Jamieson and Mike Sullivan.

Also Present: Dave Reid (Avgen Ltd)

Officers: Terry Gould, Michael Kiely and Philip Turner.

ITEM 1 - APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

Apologies for absence were received from Frances Hewitt.

Gary Williams, a member of the public who had requested to ask a public question, also submitted his apologies.

ITEM 2 - DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

There were no declarations of interest.

ITEM 3 - MINUTES

RESOLVED: That the minutes of the meeting of the Forum held on 8 November 2011 be approved.

ITEM 4 - MATTERS ARISING

Page ii and iii, BAA staff had been invited to this Forum meeting but unfortunately had to decline. They (BAA) expressed a hope to attend the next meeting of the Forum. Members questioned whether this should be more a public meeting, in an alternative venue.

A review of the Forum’s Terms of Reference was in progress. The Forum discussed the start time of the meeting and agreed that this should be amended to 7pm. The Democratic Services Officer agreed to investigate the time and date of the next meeting, which was currently scheduled for 9.30am on Tuesday 8^th May.

In relation to the HACC, LAANC, SASIG and 2M update a query had neen raised by the Chairman as to how much the Borough was paying towards relevant membership fees. In response it was confirmed that no monies were being paid to 2M or SASIG. (SASIG had requested £3160 – but this had not been paid), that £640 per annum was paid to LAANC, and that £30 was paid to the Aviation Environment Federation (AEF).

In relation to Item 5, discussion on mobile monitoring boxes, it was noted that the Borough operated two fixed installations. There was one in Old Windsor and one on the roof of York House. The Head of Public Protection agreed to obtain further information in terms of new locations, suggesting that St Leonard’s Hill and Datchet would be good locations to aim for given impending changes such as the abandonment of Cranford Agreement. The Forum noted that St Leonard’s Hill was served by a telecoms mast and it was suggested that the mobile unit could be located on it.

In relation to Item 9, Glide Slope / Approach Angles, a letter to Windsor MP had been written. It was agreed that the Head of Public Protection would put in a request for a response.

ITEM 5 – BAA - SOUNDPROOFING THE FLIGHT PATH IN WINDSOR

In Mr Williams’ absence it was noted that concerns had been raised about the use of white uPVC replacement windows, which were unsuitable in some locations – especially listed buildings. The Head of Public Protection advised that the Borough had responded to a public consultation on the matter in Summer 2011. He circulated to Forum members a copy of the response and also a handy digest of community schemes and grants from BAA which was designed to provide relief from noise and blight to neighbouring communities.

ITEM 6 – VERBAL UPDATES – HEATHROW AIRPORT CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE (HACC) AND LOCAL AUTHORITIES’ AIRCRAFT NOISE COUNCIL (LAANC)

The Chairman opened the discussion by expressing his thanks to Councillor Beer for circulating a written summary of his activities in advance of the meeting. The Forum also expressed their thanks.

Members received an update from Councillor Beer. During the discussion the following comments were made:

Ø A big issue was adjusting to the Operational Freedoms trials. This would be a steep learning curve, and it was confirmed that no general conclusions had been reached.
Ø Discussions had taken place on how to fund the Avgen work. LAANC had provided £5,000 and had expressed a hope that the local authorities between them would contribute a further £5,000 towards the project. The Chairman agreed to investigate the request for funding.
Ø The abandonment of the Cranford Agreement had been delayed. It was agreed that the Head of Public Protection would write a letter to the Minister and the two local MPs to press for a date when progress on Cranford was likely to be made.

ITEM 7 – HEATHROW CAPACITY TRIALS

The Forum welcomed David Reid from Avgen Ltd. Mr Reid explained that Avgen had been monitoring the Heathrow flightpaths, and that the date of this meeting was the 99^th day of his work. Up to 35 million individual transponder signals had been logged, and over 125,000 landings and take-offs had been recorded.

During the presentation the following comments were made:

Ø Most of the data had simply been stored and awaited analysis, but four weeks worth of analysis had been completed. The data showed that there was not a typical week or a typical day.
Ø Final analysis would fall into three broad regimes. The first would be ‘no trial’ – ie the established norm. The second would be ‘Reactive Operational Freedoms Trial’ where the airport introduced measures in response to events. The third would be ‘Proactive Operational Freedoms Trial’ where the airport could introduce specific measures in preparation for possible events.
Ø The analysed data included graphs of movements in each of the hours on each day, and other spreadsheets showed individual aircraft, flight numbers and operating companies.
Ø A surprising number of light aircraft used Heathrow.
Ø There were some A380 movements recorded where the data suggested that a different runway was used to the one stated in the officially produced statistics.
Ø Cambridge University were responsible for auditing the production of the official statistics on Operational Freedoms.
Ø Colour coding the flights in and out as red and green was not ideal for those with colour blindness or for representation on a screen or monitor, but it was noted that the colours selected followed popular convention.
Ø In response to a query on what the outcome of the work would be, Mr Reid explained that there had not been a great deal of use of Freedoms up to the date of the meeting, and so the potential impact on the public was likely to be limited. Proper analysis of the data could be used to ensure that the formally adopted Operational Freedoms model was used appropriately, and not on a ‘carte blanche’ basis which could be to the detriment of Borough residents.

Members joined the Chairman in thanking Mr Reid for his comprehensive presentation.

ITEM 8 – BAA HEATHROW PLANNING APPLICATION FOR INFRASTRUCTURE CHANGES TO FACILITATE THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ABOLITION OF THE CRANFORD AGREEMENT

The content of the report was noted. Members urged BAA to make more information available on the timescale for the abolition of Cranford.

ITEM 9 – EU PAPER – BETTER AIRPORTS PACKAGE

The content of the report was noted.

A request was made that future reports include the relevant hyperlinks.

ITEM 10 – LONDON ESTUARY AIRPORT PROPOSAL

The content of the report was noted. The likelihood of such a scheme going ahead was discussed.

ITEM 11 – CIVIL AVIATION AUTHORITY (CAA) DEVELOPMENTS

Members noted the content of the report which covered the draft Civil Aviation Bill, an Addendum to Guidance to the CAA on Environmental Objectives Relating to its Air Aviation (sic), and CAA: Insight Note No. 3 ‘Aviation Policy for the Future’

It was noted that LAANC was against the use of noise envelopes (yet to be defined), as they could be too vague.

ITEM 12 – VERBAL UPDATE REPORTS

Members received verbal updates on ‘DEFRA – Additional Finding for Air Quality’, ‘Artificial Light as a Statutory Nuisance’, and ‘High Speed Rail – Government Announcement’.

In relation to High Speed Rail (HSR) an attendee advised that he had accepted the Government’s decision as inevitable but expressed regret that it would not be linked to Heathrow for twenty years. He also considered it unfortunate that Old Oak Common (a station location) was being considered as being at Heathrow.

Members discussed the western access to Heathrow and particular mention was made of the WRAtH (Western Access to Heathrow) proposal from Slough Borough Council. It was agreed that this, and the Windsor Link (being promoted by Councillor Bathurst) should be considered at the next Forum meeting.

ITEM 13 – PRESS RELATIONS

It was agreed that a press release on Glide Slope / Approach Angles should be considered when a written response had been received from Adam Afriyie MP.

Consideration would be given to a press release, or a letter to the press from the Forum, on progress towards the abolition of the Cranford Agreement.

ITEM 14 – ITEM SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE MEETINGS

Members considered whether or not the public should accept the inevitability of a third runway. There was a need to promote alternatives to Heathrow. It was agreed that ‘Alternatives to Heathrow’ would be considered at a future meeting.

MEETING

The meeting, which began at 9.30am, ended at 11.39am.

At the conclusion of the meeting the Chairman extended his thanks to Philip Turner for his comprehensive contribution to the meeting and the agenda papers.

The next meeting was scheduled to take place 8 May 2012. The Democratic Services Officer agreed to investigate this meeting taking place at 7pm on 8 May, or an alternative date.

It was subsequently agreed that the next meeting should take place at 7pm on 16^th May 2012.