Heathrow runway expansion will deafen the Queen

Marie Woolf, Whitehall Editor

THE Queen and her family are facing an “island of noise” from aircraft over Windsor Castle if the government goes ahead with plans for runway expansion at Heathrow.

Internal government documents show that the castle would be close to a noise “hot spot” caused by an intersection of flight paths from the airport.

The sound could be so intense that the 900-year-old castle, where 10 sovereigns including Henry VIII and Charles I are buried, could qualify for a grant for double-glazing and noise insulation.

function pictureGalleryPopup(pubUrl,articleId) { var newWin = window.open(pubUrl+'template/2.0-0/element/pictureGalleryPopup.jsp?id='+articleId+'&&offset=0&§ionName=Politics','mywindow','menubar=0,resizable=0,width=615,height=655'); } The documents, released under freedom of information (FoI) laws, are further evidence of the way officials have attempted to conceal problems with the runway scheme.

The Sunday Times revealed earlier this month that government officials and BAA, the airport’s owner, had “fixed” the evidence in favour of a new third runway.

The disclosure comes as BAA faces questions this weekend about its competence after the chaotic launch of Heathrow’s terminal 5 on Thursday.

Yesterday British Airways, which operates from the terminal, was struggling to shift a baggage mountain of nearly 20,000 “lost” and delayed bags belonging to transfer passengers.

It said last night it hoped to operate about 85% of planned flights from terminal 5 today and 87% on Monday, with a progressively larger flying programme throughout the week. However, it is reviewing whether to delay the transfer of long-haul operations from terminal 4 to the new terminal at the end of next month.

The Civil Aviation Authority has also written to the airline to ensure that it is complying with European legislation on passengers’ rights concerning the provision of accommodation and compensation.

The documents about the impact of a third runway detail forecasting work done for the Department for Transport in August 2006. Officials found the results surprising.

“The shape of the noise contour looked odd,” the document says, “with a potential noise ‘hot spot’ near Windsor where the southern departures crossed over the path of the northern, which produced an island of noise near Windsor (or possibly just to the west).”

Another document, written in March last year, expresses concern that Windsor Great Park could also be blighted by the sound of aircraft engines.

The documents, which forecast a number of noise possibilities, show that between 900 and 3,538 properties could require sound insulation. Some may qualify for compensation because of the rumbling of aircraft overhead.

Justine Greening, the Tory MP for Putney, who obtained the documents, said: “The Queen faces the same problem that millions of Londoners face, which is more problems from noise right overhead, but the government might have picked on the wrong resident to place beneath an island of noise.

“These documents show that thousands of households may well have to have substantial noise insulation as a result of these plans. Given that the Queen may be living in a noise hot spot, her own home may qualify for double glazing and noise insulation.”

The royal household was keeping its counsel on the expansion plans last night. “Any views on Heathrow airport are private,” a palace spokesman said.

Adam Afriyie, the Tory MP for Windsor, said: “I am deeply concerned that this information was not revealed through the consultation process, and was forced out through an FoI request.”

The forecasting was designed to ensure that the expansion of Heathrow would not lead to an increase in noise in the local area.

A government spokesman said there was “a process of refining and improving the modelling” to show how noise targets could be met in the run-up to the publication of the Heathrow consultation document.

A transport department spokesman said: “Support for adding capacity at Heathrow is conditional on the government being satisfied that strict local environmental and noise limits, set out in the 2003 White Paper, can be met.”

Date: 2015-12-24; view: 411