The Mayor's Ambient Noise Strategy - Greater London Authority
The Mayor's Ambient Noise Strategy - Greater London Authority
The Mayor's Ambient Noise Strategy - Greater London Authority
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
130 Mayor of <strong>London</strong><br />
<strong>The</strong> Mayor’s <strong>Ambient</strong> <strong>Noise</strong> <strong>Strategy</strong><br />
4C.25 <strong>The</strong> Mayor’s view is that the imbalance in the number of people under the<br />
westerly and easterly flightpaths approaching Heathrow is a strong factor<br />
supporting adoption of easterly preference (approaching from the west<br />
except when wind or other conditions dictate otherwise) for any night<br />
flights. <strong>The</strong>re are many more people living beneath flightpaths to the east<br />
of the airport (in <strong>London</strong>) than to the west. If the night rotation scheme<br />
which the Government has chosen does not substantially allay public<br />
concern, the Government should consult on introduction of full easterly<br />
preference at night (i.e. affecting the fewest people).<br />
Box 42: European Court of Human Rights - Night flights<br />
<strong>The</strong> Mayor provided a first sum of £20,000 towards a case concerning<br />
night noise regulation at Heathrow, taken on behalf of affected residents<br />
(Hatton and others) to the European Court of Human Rights. <strong>The</strong> case<br />
was supported by a wide range of interests including community<br />
organisations and local authorities. <strong>The</strong> first finding of the European<br />
Court of Human Rights 23 was that the UK Government had violated<br />
Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life and home) in its<br />
decisions in 1993 on control of night flights at Heathrow Airport. It found<br />
that adequate and independent evidence on the economic case had not<br />
been produced, and also that insufficient account had been taken of<br />
getting to sleep, or getting back to sleep, as distinct from being woken<br />
once asleep. <strong>The</strong> UK Government announced on 19 December 2001 that<br />
it was appealing on grounds related to its legal scope for discretion. <strong>The</strong><br />
European Court announced in April 2002 that it would allow the case to<br />
go forward to a Grand Chamber hearing. <strong>The</strong> Mayor provided a second<br />
sum of £20,000 towards the legal costs of the case on behalf of affected<br />
residents. <strong>The</strong> second finding of the Court, issued on 8 July 2003,<br />
effectively overturned its earlier Article 8 ruling. 24<br />
4C.26 Some groups of people, notably older people and those with some types<br />
of illness, are more likely to wake at night, and to have more difficulty<br />
getting back to sleep, once woken 25 . If sufficient reductions cannot be<br />
achieved at source consideration should be given to targeted measures<br />
(see Spatial planning and building insulation below).<br />
policy 42<br />
policy 43<br />
<strong>The</strong> Mayor supports the view that night flights should be banned. In the<br />
short term, the night quota period at Heathrow should be extended to<br />
cover the whole period from 2300 to 0700 hours, and relevant controls<br />
and financial incentives used to minimise adverse impacts within<br />
component sub-periods.<br />
<strong>The</strong> Mayor will urge the Government to assess the effects of weekly night<br />
rotation of runway preferential use at Heathrow, when the scheme has