Richmond Council reaffirms opposition to more Heathrow flights, as plans show there will be no escape from aircraft noise
Richmond Council voted to reaffirm its stance against Heathrow expansion last night, in a motion criticising the airport’s proposal to add an additional 25,000 flights a year, prior to expansion. Last week the Council condemned Heathrow’s latest consultation which considers several issues, including; 25,000 flights added prior to expansion, noise, runway alternation and night-flying relating to its 2 existing runways, as well as the proposed controversial new 3rd runway. At the full Council meeting, members from all political parties were united in agreeing that the proposals were unacceptable and would prove disastrous for Richmond upon Thames. The impact from the additional flights would be felt across the whole borough, as curving flight paths may impact on areas that haven’t been impacted by aircraft noise before. By contrast, currently most aircraft noise from approaching aircraft is concentrated over the north of the borough including Barnes, Kew and Richmond. A key councillor said this 25,000 is just the tip of the iceberg. An extra runway would mean an additional 260,000 flights a year. That is unacceptable for our health, our sleep and our environment. It will ruin the lives of thousands of people.
.
Tweet
Richmond Council reaffirms Heathrow position as new plans show there will be no escape from aircraft noise
23 January 2019 (Richmond Council press release)
Richmond Council voted to reaffirm its stance against Heathrow expansion last night, in a motion criticising the airports proposal to add an additional 25,000 flights a year, prior to expansion.
Last week the Council condemned Heathrow’s latest consultation which considers several issues, including; 25,000 flights added prior to expansion, noise, runway alternation and night-flying relating to its two existing runways, as well as the proposed controversial new third runway.
At the full Council meeting, members from all political parties were united in agreeing that the proposals were unacceptable and would prove disastrous for Richmond upon Thames.
The consultation also includes information about future ‘design envelopes’. This is information regarding where new flight paths needed to accommodate airport expansion could go over London and beyond.
The impact from the additional flights, should the airport be expanded, would be felt across the whole borough, as curving flight paths may impact on areas that haven’t been impacted by aircraft noise before.
Currently most aircraft noise from approaching aircraft is concentrated over the north of the borough including Barnes, Kew and Richmond.
The consultation document is available online at the Heathrow consultation website. The material includes a postcode checker which enables residents to see whether their home is likely to experience noise from arrivals or departures from an expanded airport.
Cllr Martin Elengorn, Richmond Council Cabinet Member for Environment, proposed the motion at the Council meeting on Tuesday 22 January 2019. He said:
“We have been repeatedly calling for information on noise impacts for years. Indeed, MPs should have received the information well in advance of making their decision on expansion.
“But, what is clear is that this 25,000 is just the tip of the iceberg. An extra runway would mean an additional 260,000 flights a year. That is unacceptable for our health, our sleep and our environment. It will ruin the lives of thousands of people.
“I urge residents, go online and do the postcode search of your home. Then have your say.”
.
See also
London Assembly report says Heathrow 3rd runway should be scrapped, due to ‘severe effects’ of aircraft noise
A report, by the London Assembly environment committee, calls for Heathrow expansion to be stopped, due to the effects of aircraft noise. The report has renewed calls for the 3rd runway to be stopped. The noise from aircraft negatively affects work, relaxation and sleep, with “severe effects” on health and wellbeing. Caroline Russell, chairman of the committee, said: “The experiences of residents living with the daily nightmare of overhead noise are deeply worrying. This drive towards filling airspace capacity must be checked. For too many people, including children, aircraft noise is a major dominant intrusion into their everyday lives.” If Heathrow builds the new runway, the number of flights will increase from around 475,000 to 740,000 a year. It is likely that around 200,000 more people will be badly affected by aircraft noise. Heathrow also plans to increase its flights by 25,000, to around 500,000 per year and change flight paths, including overflying new areas, even before any 3rd runway. Ms Russell added: “…aviation authorities and operators must prioritise the health and well-being of Londoners and give us a break.”
Click here to view full story…
Report from London Assembly says due to noise, air traffic should NOT increase at Heathrow or London City airport
The London Assembly’s Environment Committee has produced a report on aircraft noise,particularly now that Heathrow not only wants a 3rd runway, but has also recently announced plans for 25,000 extra flights a year, bringing new areas of London under its flight paths. The noise is increasing the negative impact for those who have no choice but to live with a debilitating noise invasion. The report found that noise nuisance levels are unacceptable; it calls for a halt on all air traffic growth at Heathrow and London City airports. The report details the impact of altitude, flight paths and out-of-hours flights on the noise suffered by many Londoners. Among its recommendations are that the noise thresholds for disturbance should be lowered, to take account of people needing to open their windows. They say: “Air traffic at Heathrow and London City should not increase and Heathrow’s third runway should not go ahead.” It also says that planes should be kept higher, and the impacts of noise from both Heathrow and London City should be considered together, not separately. Night flights should be stoped, and there should be better restrictions on flights in the early morning.
Click here to view full story…
.
.