|
|
|
|
Minutes of Headcorn Aerodrome Consultative Committee Held at ‘Wings’ on 7th July 2005
Present: Jamie Freeman – Headcorn Aerodrome Bridget Dungey on behalf of Lyn Selby HPC Brian Bristow – Smarden Parish Council Will Samuelson on behalf of James Tuke, Thurstons Roger Munn – Staplehurst Parish Council Allan Bradshaw, Maidstone Borough Council (on behalf of Jenefer Gibson) Liz Fisher – Maidstone Borough Council Tony Hill – Skybus Ballooning, Headcorn Aerodrome David Parker – HPC (joined group later) Sue Line – Headcorn Aerodrome/Secretary 1. Apologies for Absence Apologies were received from Lyn Selby (Bridget Dungey would take her place), Jerry Knight, Terry Hodges, Gill Gymer, James Tuke (Will Samelson would take his place), Jenefer Gibson (Alan Bradshaw would take her place), Miranda Kelly and Colin Highwood. 2. Minutes of the Previous Meeting The Minutes were read, approved and signed. 3. Matters Arising Alan Bradshaw was welcomed to the Committee and began by making an enquiry concerning the turning point after take-off. Jamie Freeman advised that aircraft climbed to 500ft before turning in either direction which would keep them suitably clear of the villages. On behalf of Lyn Selby Bridgit Dungey requested an update on aerobatics and Jamie Freeman advised that the Sukhoi was away at the moment and felt it unlikely that it would be back this year. He would keep the Committee advised on this point. 4 Planning Applications Concerning Evening Flying Jamie Freeman said it would be likely that the aerodrome would go to Appeal on evening flying. Liz Fisher would liaise with JF concerning the timing for placing such an Appeal. JF said that noise readings were being taken and the aerodrome was waiting for the return of Mr Lee Prebble to the Planning Department following a period of illness. However, JF was arranging to obtain noise readings and would liaise with MBC. On the subject of turbine engined aircraft, JPAF reiterated that there was not an aerodrome in the whole of the country which had this restriction placed upon it and believed it was a mistake at the time of the original application. Initially this had been recommended for propeller driven aircraft only and when the decision was made the Secretary of State at the Department of the Environment had changed it to piston. Brian Bristow said that Maidstone is sympathetic to prop versus piston and Liz Fisher confirmed that such a point would be taken on a case by case basis as MBC would need to be convinced on noise grounds. This is why JF was having readings taken so that a judgement might be made based on sound information. Brian Bristow also referred to the turbine parachute aircraft which is a considerable improvement when compared with the old piston engine and lifts more people. JF agreed that it was quicker, quieter and much more environmentally friendly. He felt it would be good to move forward on this JF mentioned that the Mission Aviation Fellowship was holding a function at the aerodrome on Saturday 17th September to enable them to thank some of their sponsors. They want a turbo-prop aircraft to visit the aerodrome on the day and would be making a Planning Application to enable this to be done. On behalf of Lyn Selby Bridget Dungey raised a question about the publication of names of any person approaching the Committee. JF confirmed that the Government Guidelines for Consulative Committees indicated that names should not be published without consent of the person concerned. Also via Bridget Dungey Lyn Selby expressed her concerns about the allocation of Boot Fair dates for the Community Centre Group. They were very happy to have been allocated a Boot Fair for the past two years and did understand that it was now somebody else’s turn. However, they were not happy with the breakdown in communication which had developed. The Community Centre Group had liaised with the Police for the first Boot Fair and it was unfortunate that this had been so heavily attended, it being the only Boot Fair in Kent on that day. JF said that part of the problem had been getting the cars off of the road quickly enough before dealing with the administrative part of taking the money and positioning. JF said that there was a serving Police Officer on Control that day and that the backlog of traffic was recorded and that this was the only Boot Fair that had caused this problem. Everyone else had always managed to deal with it. Bridget Dungey said that she did not understand why. JF said that he had suggested that the representative should go and see Trevor at the Museum and Bridget Dungey said that they had done this. She asked if it was the size of the Boot Fair which was the problem and apologised if this was the case. She confirmed that they had taken the money after parking. JF accepted this point and agreed to put the Community Centre back on the list for 2006 to see how things went. Bridget Dungey agreed that it would be a good idea for the Community Centre Group to have a further chat with Trevor Matthews. 5. Headcorn Flying Proms. JF confirmed that plans for the Flying Proms on 13th August were on-going. The aerodrome’s hedges and verges were being tidied and the formal Risk Assessment was under production. Generators would be needed for lighting; a tethered Balloon Glow was being organised, and the flying schedule was being prepared. It was hoped to attract 4,000 people as this would be the break-even point. At the moment we had sold approximately 1500 tickets. Obviously the first event would require a considerable amount of effort. Bridget Dungey enquired about the advertising and JF confirmed that Kent Messenger were supporting the event along with MBC. KM were undertaking leafleting, and producing editorials each week in accordance with the advertising budget. It was hoped that the aerodrome would be able to organise some banner towing which would also advertise the event. JF explained that the Hop Farm was doing the same thing for their War and Peace show. JF produced the advertising/booking leaflet for the Committee members to see and to take away and they had also been distributed in the village Brian Bristow suggested that articles in the Parish Magazine might help and everyone agreed that it would be nice to do something which the community might like. JF said that all the car parking would be to the south of the field and it was important to get the traffic off the main road. There were a number of options depending on the pressure of traffic including utilising the various lanes which surround the site. It was intended that there be a semi sterile area between the existing car park and the new car park so that there would be no conflict with the traffic and pedestrians. A professional car parking company (Castle Car Parking) would be in charge of parking for the whole of the day. Marshalls would attend their departure at the end of the function. The event was due to finish at 9.30 to 10 oclock and after the National Anthem there would be other music to allow people to stay or leave to ease any congestion in the car park. JF confirmed to Brian Bristow that it would be like Leeds Castle where you pick your own space in front of the stage and there would be no formal seating. There would be food stands and possibly Shepherd Neame or similar organisation for the provision of drinks. There would also be trade stands, a bouncy castle, a small fairground and other entertainments. The Proms itself would start at 7pm. On the subject of litter, Brian Bristow enquired whether there was to be a “litter pick”. JF confirmed that this would normally be done “in house”. Brian Bristow wondered whether MBC would have the facility to offer a “litter pick” as Ashford Borough had this facility. Alan Bradshaw doubted that this would be available. 6. Correspondence Liz Fisher referred to correspondence from local residents to MBC regarding noise. MBC were waiting on a response from the Ombudsman. Liz Fisher confirmed that she understood that the Council has no control over the flight of aircraft once they have taken off over the ground. However, the complainant seems to think that MBC should be in charge of any such noise. JF said that this was the same Headcorn resident who had been complaining for a number of years. Brian Bristow felt that things had much improved over the years. Will Samuelson asked whether this was anything to do with the website, and Liz Fisher said that it was not Alan Bradshaw said that, from memory, it is the CAA who has charge over this. Anybody can input to the CAA for conditions to be considered by them and request them to set out rules and regulations. Will Samuelson suggested that it would be for the Government to do this, but Alan Bradshaw said that the Government could lay down the guidelines for the CAA to implement. Will Samuelson asked about any financial implication drawn on MBC. Liz Fisher said that there was not a big financial resource on this occasion but over the years this might add up. There was a resource implication but this particular Ombudsman complaint which basically concerned noise and direction after take-off was not particularly time consuming. Bridget Dungey said that we would have to await the outcome. JF explained that the aerodrome had previously had a study into noise mitigation conducted by David Sames from the Department of Transport . Looking at the circuit patterns and Headcorn itself it was found in that study that the procedures were safe and adequate for operation. For example, the aerodrome had left hand circuits so that the student was always on the left hand side of the aircraft looking at the field. With the evening flying by PPLs we could allow circuits to the south away from the village altogether when on Runway 11 as experienced pilots would take a right hand circuit here. JF referred to Rule 5 of the ANO, known as the 500ft rule following take-off and prior to landing. If Shenley Park or Bletchenden is overflown this does not contravene any regulation and the aerodrome has erected a suitable sign to emphasise the 500ft rule. As a matter of courtesy the aerodrome actively encouraged pilots not to over-fly villages and hamlets. However, some pilots may wander off course, for example if there was a crosswind, when they would be intent on flying the aircraft and looking out for others rather than looking which house they were over-flying Will Samuelson felt the aerodrome could take heart that local communities are not completely displeased and JF said as a Consultative Committee we were dealing with far fewer complaints than others in the south-east. Bridget Dungey said that this was also a lot less than previously. Liz Fisher said that this was the first complaint that she had had to deal with in 2 years.. 7. Any Other Busines Brian Bristow asked whether people did telephone beforehand and JF said that he did have regular contacts who would call him and, for example, he would be able to move the box. Bridget Dungey felt it was much better to make a complaint to JF at the aerodrome rather than to have a complaint made about the aerodrome. JF said that people do telephone from other areas, for example Tunbridge Wells, and complain about other aircraft based elsewhere. JF said he was always keen to talk to local people and to listen to their views. JF was on Control for the bulk of the weekend and available personally, or the other Controllers were also briefed. It was noted that there was to be a Memorial Flight with the BBMF on 4th September and this would be diairised/ Notamd. Timing would be possibly just after midday. JF will be vigilant for this Alan Bradshaw asked about AFISO as opposed to Air Ground. JF said that the aerodrome was too busy to cope with that. He felt it was better to have short pieces of information received and to all watch out for each other than to have semi-controlled air space. For example, it was very difficult to get a call into Shoreham. JF also felt that the aerodrome safety record was good and he believed that this was the way forward There being no other business the meeting was closed at approximately 3.40 p 8. Date of Next Meeting The next meeting is to be on Tuesday 11th October. 2.30pm in Wings. |