1
Environmental Statement
Enabling works to allow implementation of full runway alternation
during easterly operations at Heathrow Airport
Non-Technical Summary
This is the Non-Technical Summary of the
Environmental Statement that has been prepared
to accompany a planning application by Heathrow
Airport Limited (HAL). This summary describes the
aims of the planning application, the Environmental
Impact Assessment (EIA) process and the key
fi ndings and recommendations arising from the
assessment. A list of frequently asked questions can
also be found on page 6.
Heathrow Airport
Heathrow Airport is located about 15 miles west of Central
London, within the London Borough of Hillingdon. It is
situated on approximately 1,227 hectares of land and
operates two parallel runways (the northern and southern
runway, see inset) in segregated mode, whereby arriving
aircraft are allocated to one runway and departing aircraft
to the other.
The airport is either on ‘easterly’ or ‘westerly’ operations,
depending on the wind conditions. Aircraft normally take off
and land into the wind and the prevailing winds at Heathrow
Airport are from the west (around 71% of the time).
This means that aircraft movements (departures and
arrivals) are in a westerly direction around 71% of the time.
To provide predictable periods of relief the runways alternate
when on westerly operations. The present pattern provides
for one runway to be used by landing aircraft from 06:00 until
15:00 and the other runway to be used from 15:00 until after
the last departure. This is known as runway alternation.
© LHR Airports Limited
2
The Cranford Agreement was ended in January 2009
The Cranford Agreement was a Ministerial undertaking
given in 1952 to use best endeavours to avoid using the
northern runway at Heathrow Airport for departures in an
easterly direction over Cranford.
After public consultation, the previous Government
ended the Cranford Agreement in January 2009, with the
aim of distributing noise more fairly around the airport.
Implementation of the ending the Cranford Agreement will
enable runway alternation to be introduced when the airport
is on easterly operations and give affected communities
predictable periods of relief from over fl ying aircraft.
The Coalition Government reaffi rmed their support for
this decision in September 2010. Although the Cranford
Agreement has ended, Heathrow Airport Limited (HAL) has
not yet implemented full runway alternation during easterly
operations because physical works are required to the
airfi eld to facilitate the operational changes.
Northern Runway
Southern Runway
No
NoNo
No
No
N
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
o
No
No
No
No
No
N
No
No
o
No
No
N
No
No
No
No
No
N
o
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
o
No
No
No
No
No
No
N
N
N
N
No
No
o
No
No
No
No
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
No
No
N
N
N
N
N
No
o
o
o
No
No
N
No
N
N
No
No
o
No
No
o
N
No
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
o
o
N
N
No
N
N
No
N
o
No
No
o
o
o
N
No
o
No
o
N
N
o
o
No
o
o
No
o
o
N
N
o
o
o
N
o
o
o
o
o
N
o
o
o
o
o
N
o
N
o
N
N
o
o
N
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
r
r
rt
t
t
t
rt
rt
rt
rt
rt
rtrt
r
rt
t
rt
rt
r
r
rt
rt
rt
rt
t
rt
rt
rt
rt
rt
r
r
rt
r
t
rt
rt
rt
rt
r
r
r
r
rt
rt
r
rt
r
r
r
r
r
rt
r
r
r
t
r
r
rt
rt
rt
r
r
r
r
rt
t
rt
rt
rt
r
r
r
rt
r
t
r
r
r
r
t
t
t
t
t
r
r
r
r
r
he
he
he
he
he
he
he
he
he
he
he
he
he
he
he
h
he
he
he
he
he
e
he
he
he
h
he
he
he
e
he
he
h
he
he
he
he
he
he
he
e
e
e
e
e
he
h
he
e
h
he
he
h
h
he
he
h
e
e
h
h
e
he
h
e
e
e
he
he
he
h
e
e
h
e
e
e
h
e
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
n
rn
r
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
r
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
n
r
rn
rn
r
rn
rn
r
r
n
n
rn
rn
r
r
r
r
r
rn
r
rn
rn
r
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
un
u
un
un
un
un
un
un
un
un
un
un
un
un
un
n
n
un
un
un
un
un
un
u
un
un
un
n
n
un
un
u
n
un
n
n
n
n
n
un
un
un
n
un
un
n
n
n
n
un
un
n
un
n
un
u
un
un
u
un
un
n
un
un
un
u
n
un
n
n
n
n
un
un
u
un
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
un
n
n
n
n
u
u
un
n
n
n
n
n
n
un
n
n
n
n
u
u
n
un
u
n
n
u
u
n
n
u
u
u
u
u
n
n
n
n
u
u
u
u
u
n
n
n
wa
wa
wa
wa
wa
w
wa
wa
wa
wa
wa
wa
wa
wa
wa
wa
wa
wa
wa
a
wa
a
wa
wa
wa
wa
wa
w
wa
a
wa
wa
wa
a
w
w
w
wa
wa
w
w
w
wa
wa
wa
wawa
wa
wa
wa
w
w
w
w
w
wa
wa
wa
w
wa
wa
w
w
a
wa
wa
wa
wa
a
w
w
w
w
w
a
wa
w
w
w
w
w
w
wa
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
wa
w
w
wa
wa
wa
a
a
wa
a
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
wa
w
w
w
w
w
w
wa
w
w
a
w
w
w
w
wa
wa
w
a
w
w
wa
a
a
w
w
a
a
wa
w
a
w
w
w
a
w
w
a
a
a
a
w
w
a
a
y
y
y
yy
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
So
So
So
So
So
o
o
o
So
o
So
So
So
So
So
So
So
So
o
o
So
o
So
So
o
o
o
o
o
So
So
So
o
o
o
o
So
So
S
So
S
S
o
o
o
o
S
o
So
S
S
S
So
So
o
S
S
So
So
S
S
So
o
So
S
S
S
o
o
o
o
o
So
S
S
o
o
o
o
o
S
o
o
o
o
o
So
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
u
ut
ut
ut
ut
ut
ut
ut
ut
ut
u
ut
t
t
t
t
t
ut
ut
u
ut
u
ut
u
t
u
ut
ut
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
ut
u
ut
ut
ut
ut
ut
ut
u
u
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
ut
ut
ut
ut
u
u
ut
ut
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
ut
u
u
t
u
ut
ut
u
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
ut
ut
u
u
ut
ut
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
ut
t
ut
ut
ut
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
ut
t
ut
u
ut
u
u
u
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
ut
t
ut
ut
u
u
u
t
t
t
t
t
t
ut
ut
ut
ut
ut
u
u
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
ut
u
u
u
u
ut
t
t
ut
t
t
t
t
u
u
u
u
t
t
ut
ut
ut
t
t
t
ut
t
ut
ut
t
t
u
ut
u
t
t
u
ut
ut
u
t
t
t
ut
u
t
t
u
t
t
t
u
ut
ut
ut
ut
t
t
t
t
u
t
t
t
t
t
u
u
t
t
t
t
t
ut
ut
u
u
t
t
u
u
u
u
u
u
h
h
h
h
h
he
e
e
he
he
he
e
he
he
h
e
he
he
he
he
e
e
e
e
e
he
h
h
he
he
he
he
he
h
h
e
e
he
he
he
he
he
he
he
e
e
e
e
he
he
he
h
he
he
he
he
he
he
he
e
e
he
h
he
he
he
h
h
he
he
h
h
he
h
he
e
e
e
h
he
he
h
he
e
h
h
h
h
he
h
h
h
he
he
h
he
h
h
h
h
he
e
e
he
h
h
he
h
h
h
h
he
h
he
h
h
h
h
e
h
h
h
h
h
h
h
h
he
he
he
e
he
he
h
e
e
e
e
h
h
he
h
h
h
h
h
he
he
he
he
e
e
h
h
he
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
h
e
e
e
e
e
e
he
he
he
e
e
he
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
h
e
he
he
he
e
e
e
h
e
e
e
e
e
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
r
rn
rn
rn
n
n
n
r
rn
rn
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
rn
rn
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
rn
rn
n
rn
rn
rn
n
rn
n
n
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
n
n
rn
rn
n
n
n
rn
r
n
rn
n
r
r
rn
rn
rn
rn
r
rn
r
rn
r
r
r
rn
r
r
r
rn
r
r
n
r
r
r
r
n
n
r
rn
r
r
n
n
n
rn
r
r
r
r
r
n
n
r
r
rn
r
r
r
n
n
n
r
r
rn
r
n
n
r
r
n
n
n
r
r
r
n
n
r
r
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
u
u
u
u
un
un
un
un
un
un
un
un
un
un
un
un
un
un
un
un
un
un
un
un
u
u
un
un
un
un
un
u
n
un
un
un
un
un
un
un
un
u
u
un
un
u
u
u
n
n
un
un
n
n
n
n
un
un
n
un
u
u
u
u
un
un
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
n
un
n
un
un
n
un
n
n
un
u
un
u
u
u
un
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
un
un
un
n
n
n
un
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
un
n
un
n
n
un
u
un
u
u
u
u
u
u
n
un
n
n
n
u
u
un
un
n
un
n
n
n
n
un
un
n
n
n
u
u
u
u
u
u
un
u
un
n
n
un
n
un
un
un
u
u
u
u
u
u
n
un
n
n
un
n
n
n
uu
un
u
u
u
un
u
n
n
n
n
n
un
u
n
n
un
n
un
u
u
un
n
n
n
u
un
u
un
u
un
u
u
u
un
n
u
n
un
un
u
u
un
u
u
n
n
un
n
n
u
u
u
u
n
n
n
n
u
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
u
u
u
u
u
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
un
u
u
n
n
n
n
n
n
u
u
n
n
n
n
un
u
u
n
n
n
n
u
u
u
u
n
u
u
n
w
w
w
w
wa
wa
wa
wa
wa
wa
wa
wa
wa
w
w
w
w
w
w
wa
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
wa
w
w
w
wa
w
w
w
w
w
w
wa
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
wa
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
wa
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
a
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
Cranford
Cranford
Northern Runway
Northern Runway
Southern Runway
Southern Runway
Hatton
Hatton
Cross
Cross
A30
A30
Stanwell
Stanwell
Longford
Longford
T5
T5
T5B
T5B
T5C
T5C
A4 Bath Road
A4 Bath Road
T1
T1
T3
T3
T2
T2
(under construction)
(under construction)
T2B
T2B
T4
T4
Key
New pavement
Redundant pavement
breakout areas
Proposed 5m high
noise barrier -
total length 593m
Background to the Application
To allow aircraft to use both runways (when on easterly
operations) physical infrastructure works are required to the
airfi eld on the northern runway.
The infrastructure required is relatively limited and includes:
■ Creation of a ‘Hold Area’ at the western end of the northern
runway;
■ The construction of a new taxiway; and
■ Two small areas of additional pavement to allow larger aircraft
to access and exit the runway easily.
A new 5m high noise barrier south of Longford is also
proposed and will generally follow the alignment of the
existing 3m high timber noise barrier situated between
Wright Way and the Duke of Northumberland River.
The construction programme for the Project will be over a
10 – 12 month period and is expected to be completed early in
2015. Therefore, the fi rst year that full runway alternation on
easterly operations could be implemented would be 2015.
It should be noted that these infrastructure works and the
implementation of full runway alternation will not generate
any increase in air traffi c movements, which will remain
within the limit of 480,000 movements per year.
The proposed development and the complementary works
currently being constructed on Heathrow’s southern runway,
to enable aircraft to exit that runway more quickly while on
easterly operations, will also provide the airport with more
resilience in its operation and especially following periods
of disruption to the usual pattern of operations allowing a
quicker recovery to normal.
Runway alternation is not currently possible during easterly
operations (when all aircraft movements are in an easterly
direction). Therefore, the northern runway is typically not
used for scheduled departures (over Cranford) and the
southern runway is typically not used for arrivals. This is
due to an agreement given in 1952 to use best endeavours
to avoid using the northern runway at Heathrow Airport
for departures in an easterly direction over Cranford. This
agreement is known as The Cranford Agreement and was
ended in January 2009 (see inset for more information).
3
The Environmental Impact Assessment
(EIA) Process
EIA is a process that collects information about the
environmental effects of a proposed development and
evaluates and presents this information in a way to assist
consultation and enable decisions to be made.
The assessment of effects is undertaken in an impartial
manner and the fi ndings are presented in a systematic way
in the Environmental Statement (ES), which will help to
inform decisions about whether or not the Project should
be approved. If the Project is approved, the EIA also helps
to identify controls over the construction or operation that
are needed to mitigate potential environmental effects.
The ES has been prepared by independent environmental
consultants.
The topics considered in the Environmental Statement were
established through consultation with the London Borough
of Hillingdon and other stakeholders. The topics included:
■ Air and ground noise;
■ Air quality;
■ Cultural heritage and archaeology;
■ Landscape and visual effects;
■ Ecology; and
■ Land quality.
There are a number of interrelationships between these
topics and these are picked up within the relevant chapter
of the Environmental Statement. A separate report is also
available examining the health and equality impacts on
community receptors. A Flood Risk Assessment has also
been provided.
The requirement for some topics not to be considered
was a result of consultation. In particular, the following
environmental topics were scoped out of the EIA process:
■ Hydrology and hydrogeology (although the effects on
groundwater are assessed in Chapter 11 of the ES); and
■ Traffi c and transport (this is because the proposals will have no
affect on future passenger numbers or the total number of air
traffi c movements).
Air and Ground Noise
The ES has considered the
likely signifi cant operational
effects from air and ground
noise sources. Signifi cant
noise effects during the
construction of the enabling
works are also considered.
The ES considers noise
sensitive receptors, including
residential dwellings,
education establishments,
healthcare facilities and
community facilities. The
assessments use relevant
policy and guidance, along
with measured and modelled noise levels to determine
effects. Noise mitigation and the number of buildings eligible
for noise insulation and compensation are assessed within
the ES. Eligibility refl ects current Government policy (set out
in the Aviation Policy Framework).
© LHR Airports Limited
© LHR Airports Limited
Aircraft markings on a stand for B777 and A380
Noise Defi nitions
Air Noise: Noise caused by departing and arriving aircraft.
The consideration of noise issues at Heathrow Airport has
largely focused on air noise as the main issue.
Ground Noise: All noise emitted from airside sources,
including aircraft taxiing to and from the runway via taxiways.
Typical airside noise sources comprise aircraft engine idling
and taxiing, the running of aircraft auxiliary power units
(APUs) whilst on stands, as well as ground support vehicles
and airside road traffi c.
LAeq, 16hr: In the UK, aircraft noise is typically measured
using ‘average-mode’ noise contours which take account of
the number of aircraft movements over an average 16 hour
summer day (07:00-23:00 mid-June to mid-September).
dB(A) scale: The scale used to express the sound pressure
level is the decibel (dB) scale. Most sound pressure levels
encountered lie in the range 0 to 140 dB. Noise levels in dB,
like the basic decibel scale, measure proportions so that a
10 dB increase is approximately a doubling of loudness and
a 10 dB decrease is approximately a halving of loudness.
Judgement of loudness is subjective, and dependent on the
characteristics of the sound, but the ‘10 dB increase is a
doubling of loudness’ rule is a useful general guide.
During the construction phases, the assessment identifi ed
signifi cant adverse affects at 6 properties in Longford during
night-time periods as a result of the construction of the noise
wall.
During the operational phase, the assessment identifi ed that
the Project would lead to a redistribution of noise around the
airport. In terms of air noise, the assessment demonstrated
that the number of people exposed to 57 dB LAeq, 16h would
reduce by 10,500. For those exposed to air noise exposure
above 57 dB LAeq, 16h, the assessment demonstrated that
more dwellings would be subject to decreases of greater
than 1 dB(A) than increases of 1 dB(A) by a factor of 2 to 1.
4
In terms of ground noise, the assessment identifi es an
increase in the number of residential receptors exposed to
57 dB LAeq, 16h or more. Noise maps have illustrated that
above these threshold, the Project would result in increases
in ground noise of at least 3 dB(A) within Longford and
decreases of up to 2 dB(A) in Stanwell and Stanwell Moor.
The assessment identifi ed that signifi cant adverse effects
would occur for 70 residential dwellings located in Longford
and that there would be no signifi cant benefi cial effects.
These residential dwellings would not be eligible for the
Airport’s Residential Insulation Scheme or Home Relocation
Assistance Scheme. No other non-residential sensitive
receptors were found to experience signifi cant adverse or
benefi cial effects.
A qualitative assessment of noise-induced vibration
from start-of-roll activities has been undertaken based
on measurements taken around the western end of the
southern runway. The assessment concluded that scheduled
departures from the northern runway may give rise to
signifi cant noise-induced vibration effects for dwellings with
light-weight constructions in Longford.
Air Quality
The assessment considered the likely effects on air quality
from pollutants during the construction and operation of
the Project.
The assessment has shown that at some residential
receptors in Longford there is likely to be a small increase
in average NO
2
concentrations over the year and that
concentrations at seven residential receptors may increase
above the Air Quality Objective of 40μg m
-3
as a direct result
of the Project.
In Stanwell the assessment has shown the opposite effect,
with reductions in concentrations leading to concentrations
at one residential receptor reducing below the Air Quality
Objective of 40μg m
-3
with the Project.
For the monitors around Heathrow (including at Harlington,
Green Gates and Oaks Road) the general trend in
concentrations between 2006 and 2013 has been downwards
and at Harlington, Green Gates and Oaks Road the
concentrations measured in 2011 and 2012 were less than
36 μgm
-3
.
The effect of the Project on annual mean concentrations of
particulate matter is small, with the greatest increase at
the residential receptors considered being 0.2 μg m
-3
. For
particulate matter, PM10 and PM2.5, there are no predicted
exceedences of Air Quality Objectives with (and without) the
Project with concentrations being well below the Air Quality
Objectives.
It was considered that there was unlikely to be any change in
the reported incidences of odours.
The overall effect of the Project on local air quality is
considered as not signifi cant.
© LHR Airports Limited
Various aircraft queue on taxiway for take off from Northern Runway
Decreases in air noise exposure were identifi ed under
the approach path to the west of the northern runway in
locations such as Windsor, Dachet, Colnbrook and Poyle.
Decreases in air noise were also identifi ed in areas of Hatton.
Increases in air noise exposure were found to occur in
Cranford as a result of departures and under the approach
path to the west of the southern runway in locations such as
Old Windsor and Stanwell Moor.
Using alternative measures to assess aircraft noise
effects from the Project, it has been demonstrated that
for communities located under easterly approaches to
the northern runway, the Project would lead to scheduled
periods of respite. For some communities located under
easterly approaches to the southern runway, the project
would lead to a loss of relief mitigated by scheduled periods
without overfl ights. For communities located under initial
departures, there will be changes overfl ights with some
receiving increased periods of relief, which for some, will be
scheduled according to the runway alternation.
An assessment has demonstrated that the Project would not
lead to any statistical increase in the population considered
either ‘annoyed’ or ‘highly annoyed’ by aircraft noise.
The assessment concluded that there are no signifi cant
decreases of beyond 3 dB(A) in air noise associated with the
Project. Instead there would be signifi cant adverse effects
comprising of increases of at least 3 dB(A) in LAeq, 16h at
around 1,700 dwellings located in Cranford and Heathrow
Villages. The assessments have also considered eligibility for
mitigation under HAL’s mitigation schemes as a result of the
Project. 175 residential dwellings were found to be eligible for
HAL’s Home Relocation Assistance Scheme, with a further
350 found to be eligible for the airport’s Residential Insulation
Scheme.
An assessment of night-time air noise has also been
undertaken for residential dwellings. The assessment
identifi es that the number of receptors exposed to more than
45 dB Lnight would reduce by around 1,500 and that more
dwellings would experience decreases of at least 1 dB than
equivalent increases. No signifi cant adverse or benefi cial
effects were identifi ed for night-time periods.
For other non-residential sensitive uses, the assessment
identifi es signifi cant air noise effects at 15 education
establishments, 5 healthcare facilities and 3 places of
worship. These facilities would not be eligible under the
airports current mitigation schemes as they would not fall
within the relevant noise contour..
5
Cultural Heritage and Archaeology
The assessment considered the likely effects on cultural
heritage assets during the construction and operation of
the Project.
The assessment was informed by desk studies that examine
each of the components of the Project, taking into account
available heritage baseline data, in particular the data
arising from recent large scale archaeological excavations
undertaken at the airport, and established heritage
management guidelines, including English Heritage (2011)
The Settings of Heritage Assets.
The assessment concluded that:
■ It is unlikely that archaeological remains will be affected by
realignment and construction of taxiways within the existing
airport boundary. Mitigation measures, such as developing
a Programme of Archaeological Investigations are not
proposed as they are likely to be unproductive and potentially
compromise procedures for the safe operation of the airport.
■ The character of the Longford, Norwood Green, Cranford
Park and Cranford Village Conservation Areas and the setting
of associated listed buildings, may be sensitive to changes
to the frequency and distribution of aircraft departing on the
northern runway, primarily as a result of increased noise.
The proposed noise barrier will mitigate these effects on the
Longford Conservation Area, without giving rise to signifi cant
visual affects to the setting of designated heritage assets.
■ Changes are likely to be more sensitive at Norwood Green,
Cranford Park and Cranford Village Conservation Areas,
which may experience intermittent increased noise at levels of
3dB+ within the 55 Lden noise contour. This has implications
for the aesthetic and communal values that contribute to the
heritage signifi cance of the conservation areas and the setting
of associated listed buildings. These intermittent changes in
noise levels have been assessed in the context of prevailing
circumstances, where aircraft noise is already part of
the experience encountered within the conservation areas.
There are no signifi cant effects to the historic environment
resulting from the construction phase of the Project within
the airport boundary.
Prevailing levels of aircraft noise will increase intermittently
within the Norwood Green, Cranford Park and Cranford
Village Conservation Areas as a result of changes to the
frequency and distribution of aircraft departing on the
northern runway, with implications for the aesthetic and
communal values that contribute to the heritage signifi cance
of the conservation areas and the setting of associated
listed buildings. However, the heritage assets are
predominantly valued for evidential and historic interests and
it is therefore considered that there are no signifi cant effects
on these assets.
Landscape and Visual
A Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) was
undertaken to understand how the Project may infl uence the
landscape character of the site and surroundings, or people
experiencing views of the area e.g. local residents, users of
local roads etc.
Following a methodology described by the best practice
document
‘Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact
Assessment’
certain landscape features or certain people
experiencing a view are considered to be more sensitive to
change than others. In order to understand which landscape
features and which people were most sensitive to the
proposed development, a desk based assessment and site
visit were undertaken, and also discussions were held with
the local planning authority. This resulted in the following
landscape and visual ‘receptors’ being assessed as part of
the LVIA:
■ Potential effects on tranquility levels of open spaces and areas
of ‘relative tranquility’ within the tranquility assessment Study
Area;
■ Potential effects on the local landscape character of Longford
as a result of the noise barrier;
■ Potential effects on visual receptors within the visual envelope
of the noise barrier during the construction and operation
phase. These receptors include:
— Recreational receptors using Longford ‘pocket park’
— Residents on the southern side of Bath Road between
485 Bath Road in the east and 617 Bath Road in the west
— offi ce workers within the Padbury Oaks offi ce complex.
The LVIA assessed the magnitude of change and the
overall signifi cance of the effects that these receptors
would experience. It was noted that the construction of the
proposed noise wall, and the changes to the direction of
aircraft movement would have some effect on the landscape
and visual receptors. However, as the construction of the
noise wall would only take place for 10 weeks and as views
of aircraft movements are already a common feature of
the local area, it was concluded that there would be no
signifi cant effects on any of the receptors.
Ecology
The assessment considered the likely effects on biodiversity
and ecological receptors during the construction and
operation of the Project.
Potential effects on biodiversity may occur for three
reasons, fi rstly due to impacts from the construction of the
new airport infrastructure, secondly due to changes in air
quality (specifi cally nitrogen deposition or NOx) and thirdly
due to changes to the baseline noise environment caused
by the redistribution of air traffi c. A geographical area was
identifi ed within which these environmental changes could
affect valued biodiversity.
Valued biodiversity (biodiversity receptors) that could be
signifi cantly affected by the Project, were identifi ed through
a site survey and through a collection of ecological data
from Local Biodiversity Records Centres. Valued biodiversity
6
receptors were considered to be statutory and non-statutory
nature conservation sites, UK Biodiversity Action Plan priority
habitats and legally protected or otherwise notable species
occurring anywhere within the defi ned Study Area.
The assessment of effects identifi ed whether the
environmental changes are such to cause a signifi cant effect
to occur on identifi ed biodiversity receptors. This judgement
was informed by detailed noise and air quality modelling and
information about construction activities and which, if any, of
the potential biodiversity receptors were of suffi cient quality
(for sites and habitats) or size (for sites, habitats or species
populations) that an effect upon them could be signifi cant.
The majority of biodiversity receptors assessed were identifi ed
as being at low risk from a signifi cant effect occurring.
Receptors which were identifi ed at most risk and which were
taken forward for further detailed assessment were the South
West London Reservoirs SPA, Windsor Forest and Great Park
SAC, Richmond Park SAC, their constituent parts, The Lower
Colne Site of Metropolitan Interest (SMI) and grass snakes.
For the statutory and non statutory sites the environmental
changes identifi ed as potentially causing a signifi cant
effect were changes in the air quality and noise baseline
environments. After detailed assessment using modelling
data and ecological information about these sites it was
considered that increases in emissions or noise were too
small to cause signifi cant effects. Grass snakes were
highlighted as being potentially at risk from the construction
activities associated with the new airport infrastructure,
however a mitigation strategy can be employed which
complies with the legislation relating to this species and as
such no signifi cant effect would occur.
Land Quality
The assessment considered the likely effects on land quality
during the construction and operation of the Project.
Information on land quality (including geology and
hydrogeology) at Heathrow Airport was collated from various
sources. Potential receptors were then identifi ed, including
construction workers, groundwater quality and future end
users. However, it was determined that there was not likely
to be any signifi cant effects on these receptors and no further
assessment was required.
Therefore, no signifi cant effects have been identifi ed with
the Project.
Various aircraft queue on taxiway for take off from Southern Runway
© LHR Airports Limited
Frequently Asked
Questions
1. I thought the Cranford Agreement had already ended?
It has. It ended in January 2009. However, planning
permission is required for works to the runway before the
airport can operate full runway alternation when the wind is
from the east.
2. Why are additional taxiways required on the northern
runway if aircraft can already take-off over Cranford?
The additional taxiways and Hold Areas are required on the
northern runway so that a full schedule of fl ights can be
delivered. This requires additional taxiways for easy access to
the runways and hold areas for aircraft to queue and for them
to be placed in the right sequence.
3. Who decides whether the planning application is
approved?
The application is being submitted to the local planning
authority for a decision. The local planning authority in this
case is the London Borough of Hillingdon. However, other
local authorities and stakeholders will also be consulted
during the consultation period.
4. When will a decision be made?
The local planning authority should determine the application
within 16 weeks from the date of receipt of the Environmental
Statement and planning application. However, the period may
be extended by written agreement between the authority and
the applicant.
5. Will this application result in additional aircraft
movements at Heathrow?
No. The movements are capped at 480,000 Air Traffi c
Movements (ATMs). This was a planning condition of the
Terminal 5 Planning Decision in 2001 and remains unchanged
by this development.
6. How can I fi nd out if I will be affected by noise?
Visit www.heathrowairport.com/cranford
7. Where can I get more information on the environmental
effects of the project?
The Environmental Statement is available to view on the
London Borough of Hillingdon’s website and is also available
to view on Heathrow Airport’s website.
If you would like a copy of the Environmental Statement on CD,
please send a cheque for £5 to Heathrow Airport Ltd
at the address shown below, noting reference to
“Cranford ES”. Alternatively, you may request one via
www.heathrowairport.com/cranford.
8. How can I comment on the Environmental Statement?
Details of how to response and by when can be found on the
London Borough of Hillingdon’s website and on Heathrow
Airport’s website (www.heathrowairport.com/cranford).
If you require a copy of this document in another language
please write to Heathrow Airport Ltd, The Compass Centre,
Nelson Road, Middlesex, TW6 2GW.
