PRESENT: Councillors John Lenton (Chairman), George Bathurst and Malcolm Beer.

Regular Attendees: Paul Jennings, Peter Hooper, Jamie Jamieson and Mike Sullivan.

Also Present: Stephen Turner (ANASE Peer Reviewer)

Officers: Terry Gould, Chris Nash and Simon Wright

ITEM 1 - APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

Apologies for absence were received from Cllr Alan Mellins.

ITEM 2 - DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

None were received.

ITEM 3 - MINUTES

RESOLVED: That the minutes of the meeting of the Forum held on 28 February 2013 be approved.

ITEM 4 – MATTERS ARISING

CRANFORD AGREEMENT

Councillor Beer reported that the application to end the Cranford Agreement had not yet been submitted to Hillingdon BC. Jamie Jamieson advised that the application should be available to view on the Hillingdon website when it was received but it was noted that the application paperwork would be significant. Terry Gould undertook to advise members when the application was received.

The Forum agreed that consideration would need to be given as to whether to submit comments to Hillingdon BC following consultation with planning.

ITEM 5 – HEATHROW AIRPORT - UPDATE

The Forum received and noted the slides that Nigel Milton, Director of Policy at Heathrow Airport had presented to the meeting at Windsor in March. It was noted that whilst there was concern over some of the data in the presentation it did highlight the main principles. Mike Sullivan suggested that evidencing an 80% capacity by using the Hyderabad route was not a good argument. Councillor Beer indicated that works to the South runway could be implemented under permitted development.

Councillor Beer advised that concerns had been raised regarding air quality and in particular oil and dust problems in Old Windsor. Terry Gould advised that the council did not undertake specific monitoring but was aware of concerns in the area. It was reported that Heathrow had taken samples which had indicated that the problem was associated with local traffic conditions. Terry Gould asked that any complaints/issues be forwarded for consideration.

ITEM 6 – ANASE PEER REVIEW

The Forum received a presentation from Stephen Turner who had acted as a peer reviewer in respect of ANASE. A copy of the presentation can be accessed at http://www.rbwm.gov.uk/minsys3.nsf/AMByMonth?OpenView&y=2013&m=5

Mike Sullivan sought clarification regarding the timing of the review and it was confirmed that it took place after the survey had been undertaken. Paul Jennings asked about the 57dB figure and whether it was still relevant. Stephen Turner advised that the new Aviation Policy Framework (APF) acknowledged that it was still relevant but a lower figure could be used. It was emphasised that the percentage of residents annoyed by noise at 57dB was 11%. It was confirmed that figures were calculated on a 16 hour period and it was acknowledged that there were changes in flight patterns at Heathrow. In response to the Chairman it was confirmed that the survey had totalled several thousand respondents across the country.

Jamie Jamieson suggested that ANASE had been found wanting and that it needed reviewing at some point. It was suggested that the main issue for many residents was the frequency of flights. Stephen Turner confirmed that there were no plans for a government led review but Hillingdon BC was undertaking work in respect of the peer review however there was mention in the APF of a DfT overview but no specific figures were quoted. Discussion ensued regarding the length of time any study would take, suitable noise levels, changes in attitude compared to ANIS and noise measurement systems. Stephen Turner emphasised that public attitudes could be affected if there was widespread publicity on noise issues at the time. It was confirmed that noise data was collected on an annual basis but acknowledged that frequency of flights was not included. The importance of data capture and analysing patterns of response was highlighted. It was however considered that a new ANASE was not required. Mike Sullivan emphasised the need for better understanding of the data to make decisions on capacity and environmental impact.

The Chairman suggested that attitudes could vary from area to area particularly when there were a large number of people employed at the airport as they could be more tolerant of noise. Stephen Turner acknowledged the sample size was relatively small and there was the potential for factors such as employment to impact on the responses. It was confirmed that the CAA did not undertake constant noise monitoring. Peter Hooper asked whether there was any merit in using Lden measurements instead of Leq. Stephen Turner advised that Lden was not considered appropriate as it was not susceptible to change.

Terry Gould referred to using lower than 57dB and that there was precedent for this as 54dB had been used at the Terminal 5 Inquiry and the APF appeared to give greater flexibility in this regard. Jamie Jamieson and Paul Jennings emphasised that frequency and time of flights were key issues that needed addressing. Councillor Beer advised that ANASE had been centred on Manchester airport and reiterated the work that Hillingdon BC were undertaking in reviewing elements of ANASE. Stephen Turner referred to other studies in both this country and elsewhere and themes that were identified within that information. It was emphasised, as demonstrated at Terminal 5, that outcomes could be broken down in more detail to give more targeted information. The Forum acknowledged the difficulty in balancing the various indicators to obtain accurate results.

Councillor Bathurst asked if there were any actions that could be taken to analyse the information further to highlight issues of concern. It was agreed that the presentation slides would be circulated to allow members to assess the information in more detail and any items for discussion could be bought forward to a future meeting.

ITEM 7 – NIGHT FLYING RESTRICTIONS AT HEATHROW, GATWICK AND STANSTED – STAGE 1 CONSULTATION

Terry Gould advised that the outcomes of the consultation were awaited. Mike Sullivan confirmed that West Windsor Residents Association had submitted a response and Councillor Beer advised that LAANC had done so aswell.

ITEM 8 – AVIATION POLICY FRAMEWORK

Terry Gould presented a report that had been drafted for consideration at the June Cabinet meeting. The format was outlined and sought the views of the Forum in respect of the report and issues contained in it. It was suggested that it may be preferable for the matter to be considered in detail by the Technical Working Group.

The Forum agreed this approach and Councillor Beer emphasised the importance of raising questions/issues in light of the ongoing Davies Commission. In response to Peter Hooper it was confirmed that the commission had been very independent and was well supported.

ITEM 9 – LOCAL COMMUNITY WIDENOISE INITIATIVE – UPDATE

Chris Nash confirmed that 71 residents had been registered in the first three months and circulated a map showing the location of users. The Forum noted the good take up and the initiative would continue to be promoted.

Paul Jennings asked if the rollout was still scheduled for 23 May. Chris Nash advised that the system was already live and training was being undertaken. Councillor Beer highlighted the uptake at Ham Island and suggested this was due to particular issues with vectoring in that area. Mike Sullivan expressed concern at the high readings of 90dB+ being recorded in Windsor. Chris Nash advised that the system was still being configured.

Terry Gould emphasised that the ‘pilot’ scheme was designed to empower communities and all figures would be verified and it was important to map noise concerns. It was clarified that phase 2 of the project would include static monitoring and then the results could be analysed in more detail.

Stephen Turner referred to the accuracy of readings and emphasised the need to treat results with a degree of caution. Chris Nash acknowledged there were issues with certain phones and UCL would use correction factors to moderate the results.

ITEM 10 – CE DELFT REPORT

It was noted that this item would be considered under the LA Updates.

ITEM 11 – SASIG UPDATES

Terry Gould advised that he had not received any updates for some time and this may be due to reorganisation.

It was confirmed that the 2M Group had submitted a response to the Davies Commission and this had been the subject of a press release and a copy was circulated. Councillor Beer advised that SASIG had issues at the current time due to a reduction in subscribers.

ITEM 12 – HACC UPDATE

Councillor Beer reported that the Southern Runway Resurfacing would commence at nights very soon, which could mean a few more northern runway landings. In respect of seating take up the Chief Executive Officer had announced that record average seating take up of 70 and 69.6% had been achieved in January and February. The suggestion that if most of the unused seats were used there would be no need for further runways and other problems had been raised.

Councillor Beer had asked why RBWM was excluded from the jobs and careers fair and a response had been given that it was dependent on population and Ealing is one of the priority five as its population exceeds that of the borough. It was indicated that if Nigel Milton was contacted the borough could be involved. The Chairman emphasised the need to be involved as it was important to give borough residents access to job opportunities.

The Forum was advised that roof damage and damage to cars resulting from vortex action to an Old Windsor house had been experienced and HAL was being pushed to take more realistic action. A DfT forecast of slightly reduced future demand was noted. Late take offs were commented upon again and a request had been made to see if airlines could be named rather than just recording flight call numbers.

An update was given on the Noise Mitigation Pilot Proposals Paper and
Operational Freedoms. Councillor Beer advised that the main interest in HAL’s Noise & Track Keeping Working Group and its OF sub group had related to the Operational Freedoms Trials. The OFTs finished at the end of February and a huge volume of data was being analysed.

Councillor Beer reported that that phone and face to face consultation had been carried out by Ian Flindell for HAL including Wraysbury & Datchet residents on aircraft noise. It was indicated that few of the 75 residents interviewed thought there were benefits from alternation. This had been challenged as the Isleworth and Richmond residents were not close enough to Heathrow to discern separate flight paths.

Finally it was confirmed that the Early Morning Respite Trial had finished and in respect of the Noise Action Plan 5 items from the progress monitoring needed to be selected for outside audit and suggestions of which ones was being sought.

ITEM 13 – LAANC UPDATES

Councillor Beer reported that the LAANC Executive Committee meeting had spent a long time discussing a comprehensive Night Flights response. Other activity included consideration of the Aviation Commission, and news on a rehash of the ANASE study.

ITEM 14 – LA UPDATES

Meeting with GLA

Terry Gould tabled a briefing note summarising a meeting that had been held with representatives of the GLA with regard to aviation issues. The meeting had allowed the borough to make the GLA aware of the extensive work being undertaken by authorities to the west of Heathrow and also the Thames Estuary proposals.

Councillor Beer advised that a representative of the GLA had recently addressed HAAC and Peter Hooper highlighted issues around noise insulation thresholds.

Airports Commission

The Forum received and noted the guidance documents and discussion papers that had been circulated.

CE Delft Report

Terry Gould outlined the report that had been launched and concentrated on the economics of airport expansion.

ITEM 15 – ANY OTHER BUSINESS

The Chairman circulated a copy of wording he had been using for recent interviews regarding aviation matters impacting on the borough and asked for any feedback.

Councillor Beer noted the recent press release from Theresa May MP on issues and suggested it would be beneficial to get the involvement of Adam Afriyie, MP for Windsor, in the work of the Forum. The Chairman undertook to raise the matter with Mr Afriyie.

Peter Hooper raised the issue of deadlines for making representations to the Davies Commission. Terry Gould suggested that responses made to other documents already covered the main issues and would be taken in to account. Discussion ensued about making specific representations to particular subject areas, the need to offer alternative solutions and the forum needing to develop an ethos of how to deal with issues that arose.

ITEM 16 – DATES OF FUTURE MEETINGS

It was noted that future meetings were scheduled as follows:

27 August 2013
12 November 2013
19 February 2014
14 May 2014

All meetings to be held at the Guildhall, Windsor commencing at 7.00pm.

MEETING

The meeting, which began at 7.05pm ended at 9.20pm.