Staines Town Society response to Heathrow airspace and future operations consultation document, February 2019.
Staines Town Society is a local amenity group founded in 1972 with a membership of about 120 households living in and around Staines.
Staines Town Society strongly objects to proposals to break the flights cap imposed after the Terminal 5 Inquiry and inflict another 25,000 flights per year on local people (referred to as ‘making better use of existing runways’). New technology should be used to redesign flightpaths to reduce the burden of noise and spread it more fairly. It should not be used to squeeze in more flights, with consequent increases in noise, pollution and carbon emissions, even before the building of the third runway We oppose the use of Independent Parallel Approaches as a means of achieving this increase.
We strongly object to the proposals shown in Design Envelopes D 7,8,9,10 for the expanded airport, which suggest that up to 17 planes an hour will perform a sharp twist and fly directly over Spelthorne. We are not convinced that this unlikely manoeuvre is necessary.
Q1 . We do not agree with the Noise Objective, which is:
To limit and, where possible, reduce the effects of noise on health and quality of life and deliver regular breaks from scheduled flights for our communities during the day and night. We need to do this whilst making sure the measures we put in place are proportionate and cost-effective.
This is too weak. The phrase ‘where possible’ and the second sentence should be removed as they give HAL a let-out from reducing noise. The unquantified reference to ‘regular breaks’ is meaningless. It should say ‘regular breaks of no less duration than at present’.
We have no confidence in the proposed legally binding obligations to limit airport growth. Who would take action, and what action, when the legal obligations were broken? The UK has been breaching its legal obligations on air pollution for years, and what happens? Nothing.
Q2 We argue that daily respite is essential but object to the proposed reduction to 4-5 hours. New technology should be used for improvement, not for making conditions worse, and plans which involve reducing respite are unacceptable.
We propose a general principle of Respite for All. This means that particular care must be taken to provide respite for communities who may be doubly overflown, e.g. from both runways, from both arrivals and departures, from Heathrow and London City airport, and from helicopter routes.
Q4 We strongly object to night flights, which in a civilised society would be banned entirely. Option 1 is the least bad, with disturbance only from 6am on two days out of three. Rules restricting night flights should be strictly enforced, with larger fines, paid to the communities overflown.
Local Factors: the priority should always be to avoid areas where most people live.
Mrs J Wand-Tetley Chairman
Mrs A Damerell Secretary
on behalf of Staines Town Society
Recent Comments