28.12.2014 Views

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

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

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

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!