Kent International Airport – your questions answered

What is a Section 106 agreement?

It’s an agreement between the planning authority, in this case Thanet District Council, and a developer. Usually an agreement will stipulate the contributions that the developer must make to benefit the community, because of the impact of the development.

The Section 106 agreement for the airport is slightly different, as it’s not linked to the granting of planning permission. It was entered into voluntarily by the airport owners in 2000, but it remains in place. The content of the agreement seeks to control environmental impact, whilst enabling the airport business to operate successfully.

What does this Section 106 agreement on the airport cover?

The Section 106 agreement restricts night time flying. Night time flying is defined as between 23.00 and 07.00 and it sets targets for overall noise levels for the airport through what are known as noise contours. Effectively, these are based on average noise over a 12 month period, enabling the Council to review whether the airport is creating more or less noise on an annual basis.

Because more people live at the Ramsgate end of the runway, the 106 agreement also requires that the airport owners should achieve a target of 70% of all departures away from Ramsgate.

The airport owners also have to provide noise and air quality monitoring and preferred noise abatement routes are also set out in the agreement. These aim to minimise noise disturbance to residents.

There are noise abatement routes set out in the agreement. These describe the flight path, at associated altitude, aircraft must aim to achieve. Variance may occur if unavoidable due to wind speed and direction for example.

How does it get amended or updated?

If both parties, the Council and the airport owners, Infratil Airports Europe, agree, the Section 106 agreement can be changed. The agreement must reflect business usage at the airport, particularly the number of aircraft movements.

Why isn’t the Council renegotiating the 106 now?

Infratil Airports Europe operates Kent International Airport, along with several larger airports, both elsewhere in this country (Glasgow Prestwick), Germany and Wellington in New Zealand. The company is investing in necessary infrastructure at Kent International, such as radar, new power supplies and runway maintenance, but future business developments and expansion proposals are under development. Any new agreement must be linked to a known and increasing volume of aircraft movements. Therefore, the Council needs to know details of the number and type of aircraft and any projected increase in traffic levels to the airport, before we can begin to draft a new agreement that puts measures in place to minimise the disruption to local people’s lives.balance the benefits flowing from airport development with the other needs of the community with appropriate environmental controls..

Wasn’t it meant to be updated after the consultation a couple of years ago?

Yes it was. At that time, scheduled passenger flights were flying on a daily basis and the signs were that this growth would continue. Unfortunately, the business went into administration and the airport closed. Because nothing was happening and the negotiation of a new 106 agreement needs to be linked to increasing aircraft movements, no update was undertaken at that time.

However, the Council has kept all of the results of that consultation and that information will be the cornerstone of what we want to see in a future Section 106 agreement.

What did the results of that consultation say?

We know that, at that time, most people in the area supported the development of the airport, but there are several some reservations from some people, especially those underneath the flight path. Thereis is also consensus that night time flying is unpopularshould not be allowedrestricted.

Why aren’t training flights covered by the 106?

Training flights were never included in the Section 106 agreement, because historically they have not been a significant part of the airport’s business. The fact that the airport is being used by some commercial operators at the moment is merely a reflection of how quiet its core business is. For example, there are less than half the daily aircraft movements today than in 2005, when the scheduled flights were taking place.

What is the Council doing about training flights?

The Council has received around 20 complaints in recent weeks (end of August 2007) about training flights. The only controls are that aircraft which are training must adhere to are restrictions governing circuit heights and preferred preferred noise abatement routesroutesrestrictions governing circuit heights (see question about what the S106 covers). Discussions with Infratil and reports to the Kent International Airport Consultative Committee from air traffic control confirm that all training flights are instructed on the preferred routesrestrictions in place and checks are made to ensure that pilots follow those instructions.adhere to them. If anyone thinks they observe a training flight or any other aircraft movement not following the preferred routes, as set out in the Section 106 agreement, they should contact the airport complaints line (insert e-mail link) and can also contact the Council (insert e-mail link) Comments with relating to observed flying activity can be passed to Kent International Airport (insert link) or the Council.

Will they be restricted in the future?

As the airport’s passenger and cargo business expands, there is bound to be less scope for training flights. This is because training requires uninterrupted access to the runway.

These training flights come in very low over houses. How low are they actually permitted to fly?

The legal minimum for an aircraft to fly is 500 feet, if it’s not on approach to the runway. It is very unlikely that they would fly at less than 500 feet.

What about this claim that the restrictions were changed in February 2007? Was the Council involved in this?

No. The Civil Aviation Authority is responsible for air safety and it issues circulars to the aviation industry. In addition, every licensed airport also produces pilot information. In February, the content of the pilot information manual regarding Kent International Airport was amended. The issues regarding air safety are nothing whatsoever to do with the with the Council. The preferred noise abatement routes, as set out in the Section 106 agreement, are unaffected and continue to apply.

Is it true that the training flights don’t have to stick to the agreed routes in the 106?

Absolutely note. No, tThe Section 106 agreement applies to all flights. The agreement allows for varience in aircraft routes depending on operational requirements, wind direction and other factors.

Whose job is it to monitor training flights?

Infratil has a duty to control aircraft movement within the airspace of the airport and that is the important work of its air traffic control team and they keep records of this. These are available to the Civil Aviation Authority and the relevant records are provided to the Council, such as details of any night time aircraft movements (some of which are fined)attract a payment into a Council Administered Community fund) and runway usage. When the Council receives complaints about alleged off route aircraft, it does take those cases up with Infratil, because they could be considered as breaches of the 106 agreement. Tthe circumstances are investigated to ensure ongoing compliance with the 106 agreement.

Wasn’t there an investigation into this by the District Auditor? What did he say about it?

The District Auditor has said in a letter to a local resident that: "our discussion with officers and our review of records has identified that the current activity at the airport is relatively low. As a result, the Council has adopted a proportionate approach to monitoring, that balances the interests of the community against the Council's aim to see the airport develop. You will appreciate that for such a level of activity, the Council could not justify the expenditure required to implement a comprehensive stystem of monitoring and I see no reason to challenge that judgment.”