Airport Consultative Committee

[TheLocalYokel]

How could the terminal be extended southwards ? I'm failing to see how it could

Southwards, I could only imagine you could extend into the void between Gates 1 to 4 and the walkway to gates 8-16 and the Central Pier, I don't know how else you could achieve a southern extension.....

I'm glad I'm not the only one puzzled by this.

The other point is that they appear to be intending to extend the terminal further when one of the options in the consultation document is to demolish it, albeit it's less than 20 years old with the extensions already in place only built within the last few years.

 

[Marko1]

New CEO has been announced today starting august 1st.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

A couple of other things in the minutes perhaps worthy of a mention.

Outstanding reserved matters are being prepared including the south side taxiway and aircraft stands on the site of the existing old terminal building (otb). There have been rumours about work to convert the otb area starting next year. The original expansion plans call for an eastern walkway and aircraft stands being built on the otb area once the building is demolished, although there might an initial half-way house.

I thought a south side taxiway would only come into play if a second terminal was built on the south side of the airport.

The minutes also speak of over 8.5 mppa in 2018. Given the airport's contrarian method of counting passengers this would equate to over 8.6 mppa in CAA terms which is the sort of figure a number of us were suggesting a few weeks ago. This would be a bit down on 2017 and noticeably down on 2016 but still a decent continuation of overall growth since 2014 - in fact it will be the airport's ninth consecutive year of growth since 2010. It looks as though summer will be responsible for larger growth in percentage terms than the current winter.

 

[sierrafoxtrot]

Just catching up on this post, I dont think a runway extension over Felton Common would be possible as not only do you need to extend the runway you also need to put a taxiway alongside which widens the impact somewhat, either that or all aircraft would need to backtrack and turn 180' at the end!

 

[Aviador]

Just catching up on this post, I dont think a runway extension over Felton Common would be possible as not only do you need to extend the runway you also need to put a taxiway alongside which widens the impact somewhat, either that or all aircraft would need to backtrack and turn 180' at the end!

I can assure you it is possible. The problem lies with the commitment and desire to carry out the work. It goes back many years now but I remember when Leeds extended it's runway. I don't think anybody thought it was possible there either but they did and by 600m, around twice the length of the more recent Birmingham runway extension. The land at Leeds was undulating with sloping banks leading towards a dam to the side.

Credit: Aireborough Historical Society

Credit: Aireborough Historical Society

A runway extension of around 300m at BRS would make a huge difference if the same distances could be replicated onto the declared distances for landing and taking off. If a runway extension of 300m is too big a pill to swallow for local people, a shorter extension of 150m at each end is achievable. Note the picture of the tunnelling work above in the first picture.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Just catching up on this post, I dont think a runway extension over Felton Common would be possible as not only do you need to extend the runway you also need to put a taxiway alongside which widens the impact somewhat, either that or all aircraft would need to backtrack and turn 180' at the end!

Good to see you back, Simon.

The current master plan (that published in 2006) deals with the runway issue in some detail. The airport considered five options, all based on extensions at the eastern end. The land at the western end falls very steeply at the end of the runway and any extension would require a major earth-moving exercise or some form of raised structure to carry the runway extension, as at Funchal for example - I know that BRS followers are aware of the difficult topography but other readers might not be.

The current options are:

1. Do nothing.

2. Extend runway by 140 metres.This is the maximum whilst remaining within airport land without the need to encroach on Felton Common. A 150-metre tunnel to carry the A38 would still be needed for this very modest extension. Runway length would be 2151 metres.

3. Extend runway by 389 metres.This is the maximum whilst remaining within airport land but the ILS localiser and probably approach lighting would need to be relocated on to Felton Common with a 240 metre by 150 metre area of the common coming under airport control. It may also be necessary to regrade parts of the common. Runway length would be 2400 metres.

4. Starter strip for take-off but not for landing purposes. This would add 389 metres to the 27 take-off run but only about 150 metres to the 09 take-off run. With a starter strip the need to encroach on Felton Common is avoided.

5. Extend runway further. This would require the approach lighting to be significantly altered and extended, with this and probably alterations to meet safety standard having a significant effect on Felton Common. The common has been declared a Local Nature Reserve by the local authority which is another obstacle to be overcome (my italics).

In 2006 the airport decided that the improvement in performance that might be achieved by extending the runway is relatively small in comparison with the costs and the potential environmental impact. Therefore at that time the airport's preferred option was the first one - do nothing. However, the matter would be kept under review in subsequent updates of the master plan. That they did not put the matter out for public consultation for the current master plan update it can only be assumed that the airport is entirely convinced that an extension is not necessary and there is no need to seek the public's views on it.

 

[sierrafoxtrot]

Good to see you back, Simon.

The current master plan (that published in 2006) deals with the runway issue in some detail. The airport considered five options, all based on extensions at the eastern end. The land at the western end falls very steeply at the end of the runway and any extension would require a major earth-moving exercise or some form of raised structure to carry the runway extension, as at Funchal for example - I know that BRS followers are aware of the difficult topography but other readers might not be.

The current options are:

1. Do nothing.

2. Extend runway by 140 metres.This is the maximum whilst remaining within airport land without the need to encroach on Felton Common. A 150-metre tunnel to carry the A38 would still be needed for this very modest extension. Runway length would be 2151 metres.

3. Extend runway by 389 metres.This is the maximum whilst remaining within airport land but the ILS localiser and probably approach lighting would need to be relocated on to Felton Common with a 240 metre by 150 metre area of the common coming under airport control. It may also be necessary to regrade parts of the common. Runway length would be 2400 metres.

4. Starter strip for take-off but not for landing purposes. This would add 389 metres to the 27 take-off run but only about 150 metres to the 09 take-off run. With a starter strip the need to encroach on Felton Common is avoided.

5. Extend runway further. This would require the approach lighting to be significantly altered and extended, with this and probably alterations to meet safety standard having a significant effect on Felton Common. The common has been declared a Local Nature Reserve by the local authority which is another obstacle to be overcome (my italics).

In 2006 the airport decided that the improvement in performance that might be achieved by extending the runway is relatively small in comparison with the costs and the potential environmental impact. Therefore at that time the airport's preferred option was the first one - do nothing. However, the matter would be kept under review in subsequent updates of the master plan. That they did not put the matter out for public consultation for the current master plan update it can only be assumed that the airport is entirely convinced that an extension is not necessary and there is no need to seek the public's views on it.

Thanks, good to be back!

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Consultative Committee Meeting 25 April 2018

Minutes of the above were published yesterday. I've set out out a few of the points raised below. The full minutes can be accessed via the airport website.

1. An 'unusual' monthly decline in passenger numbers had occurred in March that was due to 400 flights being cancelled because of snow. The hard work of the staff in minimising disruption during these periods was acknowledged.

2. 50 new staff had been recruited with approximately 300 people working directly for the airport, and more than 3,000 working on site. The job fairs had been very successful, including the event held at Weston College. The recently appointed CEO, Dave Lees, would take up his post on 1st August 2018.

3. The contracts for five catering units were being tendered, with the aim of providing more choice, new brands and value for money for passengers.

4. New routes were discussed but there was nothing not already in the public domain.

5. 1,750 responses had been received in connection with the initial consultation into the new master plan. A wide range of issues had been raised including surface access, speedier security, carbon footprint and international travel. The second stage of the consultation will take place between 14 May and 6 July and will include direct mail to 30,000 households, as well as 20 consultation events, giving further detail on phasing, timing and detail of developments (short, medium and long- term).

6. In parallel with this, a pre-application consultation would be held for a planning application to increase the passenger limit to 12 million passengers. The pre-application consultation would include proposals for a new canopy at the front of the terminal, extensions to the terminal, the addition of a third multi-storey car park, local junction improvements, an on-site gyratory system and airfield enhancements. There were no plans to increase the annual number of night flights currently permitted.

7. A list of forthcoming planning applications was tabled by the planning manager. She listed some operational development requests under the General Permitted Development Order (New Admin Building, 2 no. Coaching Gates and Silver Zone internal access road) and Reserved Matters under the 2011 Planning Consent (Car Hire Consolidation Centre, Aircraft Stands and Acoustic Fence). Outstanding reserved matters would need to be submitted by February 2019. The application relating to the change of use of land to the south east of the runway adjacent to the A38 had been approved subject to conditions.

8. As seems to be the practice at BRS consultative committee meetings, some matters were disposed of by reference to reports that would be placed before committee members but which are apparently not available for public access. This might be reasonable where there are commercial confidentialities but some seem to be merely statistical.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Consultative Committee Meeting 25 July 2018

Minutes now published on airport website. It was attended by Dave Lees, at that time the incoming airport CEO. This is a summary of some of the main points covered. The full minutes can be found on the airport website.

• It was acknowledged that the airport had won the ACI Best Airport Award for airports handling 5-10 mppa.

• The airport’s efforts to reduce carbon footprint had been recognised with a Level 2 accreditation from a global industry programme. There had been an overall reduction in carbon emissions whilst the airport continued to grow.

• The unusually hot weather had not impacted on passenger numbers with 2018 set to be the busiest ever (as were 2014, 2015, 2016 and 2017 - my italics).

• In response to a question it was clarified the intention to expand airport capacity did not mean there would be a change to the structure of the airspace which was not required for passenger growth to 12 mppa, although the airport was committed to improve airspace arrangements in the long term. Any future airspace alterations would be governed by a separate process to the master plan consultation and forthcoming planning application for growth to 12 mppa.

• Whilst the formal master plan consultation had closed the airport management would still be willing to talk to local councils etc. The next step would be the publishing of a draft plan for further consultation early in the New Year (that timeline has slipped then; it was supposed to be towards the end of this year - my italics).

• Detailed supporting planning documents were being prepared for submission to North Somerset Council and would include an Economic Impact Assessment and consultation report. The EIA scoping assessment had been submitted and the response was awaited. It was envisaged that the planning application would be submitted in autumn 2018.

• Planning applications/GPDO (General Permitted Development Order) requests which had recently been submitted to North Somerset Council included the new admin building, the Eastern walkway and 3 no. aircraft stands (not quite sure what is meant by that - presumably 3 new aircraft stands - my italics). There are also imminent planning applications/GPDO requests/reserved matters which include staff bus waiting area, car hire consolidation centre, airline offices, use of Cogloop, drainage application and south side taxiway and apron.

• One member of the committee was concerned that moves to rationalise the night quota count limit (moving to an annual limit instead of separate limits for summer and winter) would lead to more night flights in the summer months. The relevant airport manager said he was happy to discuss the plan with individual committee members.

• BRS continues to do well with ASQ (air service quality) results and details were presented to the committee.

Generally, then a meeting that reflected the ongoing move to enable the airport to handle increasing numbers of passengers rather than revealing anything spectacular not already in the general public domain.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Consultative Committee Meeting 31 October 2018

Minutes of above are now on airport website. Nothing of any startling nature was revealed and generally it was a re-statement of matters that have already been given a public airing. I've highlighted below some of the matters discussed.

+ The committee chairman referred to the cyber attack and praised staff for their efforts in maintaining customer services. Measures are being taken to strengthen protection.

+ The airport is supporting initiatives regarding inbound tourism. A new marketing campaign will highlight the range of destinations available from BRS (yesterday I saw a large hoarding just to the city side of the Three Lamps where the A4 and A37 split, advertising the airport).

+ It was noted that surface connectivity to the airport was being investigated at a regional level but in the meantime short term improvements would be important.

+ It was confirmed that DHL would become the third ground handler at the airport.

+ Again a confirmation - the multi storey car park was now at its next phase and the new fire station should be completed by Christmas.

+ The Planning and Sustainability Director gave an update on various applications submitted in relation to the 2011 planning permission with permitted development applications likely to be submitted in the next quarter. All outstanding matters from the 2011 planning permission have to be submitted by 16 February next year and they include the south side taxiway and apron.

+ A number of other items were discussed but, to my mind, nothing of earth-shattering importance.

The minutes can be viewed via this link.

https://www.bristolairport.co.uk/about-us/who-we-are/airport-consultative-committee/papers

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Consultative Committee Meeting 30 January 2019

Minutes of above are now on airport website. Most of the matters minuted have been in the public domain.

More and more items seem to be disposed of by a written report to the committee which are included with the agenda papers but are not available to the general public. Whilst I can appreciate and fully understand that where things of a commercial or other confidential nature are involved the details cannot be laid before public view, but the new CEO now appears to be following that path with his own written report to the committee unlike his predecessor who would address the committee, with a summary of his comments included in the minutes.

With the new CEO the minutes merely outline those subjects contained in his written report. Below is a precis of some of the matters brought to the committee's attention.

+ CEO Dave Lees's written report drew particular attention to passenger numbers (8.6mppa), Brexit (continuity of flights regardless of the outcome), 12mppa planning application, review of measures regarding drones, a meet the buyer event and capital works (new administration building, new consolidated car rental and multi-storey car park). He also updated on the Community and Diamond Fund, new passenger services facilities (food and beverages outlets), new route to Montpellier and operation of 5 neo aircraft by easyJet at the airport.

+ The airport's Head of Government and Stakeholder Relations did a presentation on the Government's Green Paper Aviation 2050: The Future of UK Aviation under the following themes: Build a global and connected Britain; Ensure aviation can grow sustainably; Support regional growth and connectivity; Enhance the passenger experience; Ensure a safe and secure way to travel; Encourage innovation and new technology. In essence, the government supports the sustainable growth of aviation. Bristol Airport would be responding to this consultation prior to 11th April 2019 deadline. There fllowed a discussion about the effect of emissions on climate change and the ways in which the situation coud be managed.

+ The airport's Planning and Sustainability Director reminded committee member of the consultation process undertaken with regard to the airport's planning application to take it to 12 mppa. A government survey indicated that awareness of the application is high and that there is a high level of support. (I was not aware the goverment had carried out a survey nor of whom. Why would they? At this stage it's a matter for the airport and the local authority. Can anyone enlighten?)

+ The airport's Surface Access Strategy Manager (I love these titles) tabled a Parking Summit report that updated members on problems caused in local villages by on-street and off-street parking generated by activity at the airport (one of our F4A members outlined a situation of inconsiderate parking by a BRS passenger outside his sister's house in Wrington recently). There is a commitment within the 12mppa planning application to develop an authorised waiting area and drop off facility; implement local parking controls and enforcement . An airport email address has been provided where anyone can report any parking issue. North Somerset Council is to formulate a Parking Study that will look at street parking in surrounding villages.

+ The airport's Head of Sustainability upated the committee on the Summary 2018 Noise Contour Publication which would shortly be submitted to North Somerset Council which deals with noise contours and which local properties would be eligible for the grant scheme.

+ The committee received written reports on passengers statistics, aircraft movements, public transport use and the Environmental Monitoring Report for ther final quarter of 2018.

+ The airport's Planning Manager tabled a quarterly planning update, outlining the applications submitted to North Somerset Council in the last quarter. She made particular reference to the temporary cabins for ground handling staff, 260 spaces on the ‘radar’ site, the development of the southside taxiway link and apron and the revision to layout of the hardstanding. She also drew attention to the applications due to be submitted in the next quarter.

+ The airport's Customer Service Delivery Manager briefed the committee on customer feedback and complaints for the final quarter of 2018. Although complaints had increased by 7% (in line with increased passenger numbers) the airport had still finished third in the ASQ (Airport Service Quality) league table of UK airports. Challenging areas in this quarter included the flight information display scheme, catering facilities during building work and baggage collection. Whilst there had been an increase in buggies, walkways and escalators (More walkways and escalators? Where?) committee members would welcome the introduction of travellators. The 12 mppa planning application did include an immigration hall and the east walkway had been designed so that travellators could be included (which is not the same thing as saying they will be included).

+ There was a summary given of payments from the Bristol Airport Local Community Fund andnDiamond Fund.

+ There was a discussion on airspace with the airport management stating that there was no need for airspace changes resulting from the 12 mppa planning application but changed may be driven at a National level.

Apart from the allusion to problems with the flight information displays there is nothing in the minutes to say whether the airport has now fully recovered from the IT attack sustained at the end of last summer.

Full minutes can be accessed via this link.

https://www.bristolairport.co.uk/about-us/who-we-are/airport-consultative-committee/papers

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Consultative Committee Meeting 24 April 2019

Minutes now published on BRS website but they don't really tell us anything that was not already in the public domain. Yet again some items are disposed of in the minutes simply by reference to the committee receiving written reports with no detail provided. I'll summarise the main items:

+ A presentation was made regarding passengers with reduced mobility.

+ The CEO presented a written report to the committee with only the headings shown in the minutes which include such matters as passenger numbers; the demise of flybmi; new routes; easyJet aircraft; carbon savings; comments about various other items having a bearing on the airport, most of which had been subject of press releases.

Whether the committee was told anything further about how the airport was responding to the loss of flybmi is unknown as only the headings appear in the minutes.

+ The Aviation Strategy Green Paper was mentioned in the context of responses being included with the Agenda sent to committee members. No clue was given as to the nature of the responses.

+ The planning application to support 12 mppa was another item briefly minuted with no further information shown.

+ The committee received written reports on passenger numbers, aircraft movements and public transport use.

+ There was a discussion on the Environmental Effects Working Party and the Environmental Monitoring Report, but nothing of any earth-shattering interest appeared.

+ The Planning and Sustainability Director referred to a number of permitted development applications that had been referred to North Somerset Council but from memory they've been mentioned before and the director was updating the committee.

+ The final items in the minutes related to the Service Quality Report/ASQ results and the Bristol Airport Community Fund.

There was a time when the minutes of these meetings would throw up some interesting information not previously generally known. That seems largely a thing of the past.

If anyone wants to see the full minutes they can be accessed as usual via:

https://www.bristolairport.co.uk/about-us/who-we-are/airport-consultative-committee/papers

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Airport Consultative Committee (ACC) Meeting 24 July 2019

Still no appearance of the minutes of the above meeting on the airport website. The next meeting is only three weeks away. I suspect the ACC secretariat will blame the omission on the human factor as has happened in the past when I've queried the late publication of ACC minutes. I'm not going to ask this time. I'll leave it to see how long it takes for the minutes to appear without being pushed. The minutes have become less informative as the years go by anyway.

DfT guidance to airports expects 'all aerodromes to communicate openly and effectively with their local communities and users of the airport about the impact of their operations', and goes on to say that airport consultative committees are 'a well-established way in which airports can engage with key stakeholders in the local area and beyond'.

The guidance lists various groups that would have an interest - they might vary from airport to airport - one of which is passengers. The membership of the BRS ACC consists of one representative from each of the following:

An independent chairman
The airport
CBI
Business West
ABTA
Airlines operating at BRS
TUC
Local authority officer concerned with tourism
A representative from each of ten local authorities/parish councils

There is no obvious representative from this group who would be primarily concerned with the interests of passengers.

DfT guidance allows individual ACCs latitude as to how they conduct their meetings including the admission of non-members to meetings.

I've looked at the ACCs for BRS, CWL (its nearest airport) and LBA (an airport with many similarities to BRS). When it comes to the admission of the general public to ACC meetings they all operate differently.

BRS

Whereas the independent chairman in his introduction on the BRS website says the meetings are 'generally open to the public and we welcome interest in what we do' it's not that simple. Further down the page we are told that anyone 'wishing to attend a meeting must write to the Consultative Committee Secretary in advance and provide details of name, organisation represented and the reason wishing to attend the meeting'. The request 'will be reviewed and response will provide necessary details regarding visitor passes and car parking'.

The BRS ACC's Conditions and Terms of Reference adopted in 2004 and amended at various later dates lay down that 'Meetings of the Committee may be open to the Press and Public at the discretion of the Committee. None of them are entitled to speak. It is recognised that in some circumstances public access could hinder the flow of information, possibly preventing free and frank discussion. It may, therefore, be necessary hold meetings, or parts of meetings, in private when matters of a confidential or sensitive nature are being discussed'.

It seems from this that neither the public nor the Press are allowed to ask questions at the meeting, assuming they have been permitted to attend in the first place. Accepting that there might be times when confidential business is being discussed and the public excluded (although one wonders how confidential it might be given the wide-ranging group of members from outside the airport company who would be privy), I don't get the feeling that the public are really welcome, despite the independent chairman's words.

LBA

On the face of it LBA has a slightly more relaxed regime in that 'Members of the public are welcome to attend a meeting as an observer and any questions may be put to the Committee in advance, to be answered during the meeting'. However, 'Any questions or requests to attend a meeting of the ACC should be sent to the Chairman of the ACC at the following address' (provided).

CWL

This appears to be the most liberal and open approach of the three with the 'The meetings open to attendance by members of the public and there will be an opportunity after the main proceedings for questions from the floor'.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Re my previous post, the minutes of the ACC meeting held on 24 July have still not appeared on the airport website in the ACC section. The next meeting was scheduled for yesterday (23 October) but no agenda has appeared.

Against my better judgement - I had intended to wait to see how long it would take for the minutes to appear but the stage has now been reached where they may not appear at all - I've sent an email to the ACC secretariat seeking clarification of the current situation. if I receive a reply I will post the gist here.

 

[superking]

And yet again something that distances the airport to customers and all general bodies.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

And yet again something that distances the airport to customers and all general bodies.

As I said in my previous post, DfT guidance to airports expects 'all aerodromes to communicate openly and effectively with their local communities and users of the airport about the impact of their operations', and goes on to say that airport consultative committees are 'a well-established way in which airports can engage with key stakeholders in the local area and beyond'.

The airport doesn't run the ACC through. That's the responsibility of an independent chairman or woman, assisted by a secretariat.
The airport CEO is a committee member along with representatives of other bodies such as trade unions, business groups, airlines, local authorities etc.

I can't think of any other reason for the lack of minutes after so long and the absence of an agenda for the meeting that presumably took place yesterday other than shoddy admin by the ACC secretariat or a change of policy.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

I'm still waiting for a reply to my email of 24 October from the ACC secretariat. Minutes for the 24 July meeting have still not appeared on the airport website; neither has the agenda for the last scheduled ACC meeting on 23 October.

I'll give it until Friday and if necessary chase them up again.

 

[superking]

I'm still waiting for a reply to my email of 24 October from the ACC secretariat. Minutes for the 24 July meeting have still not appeared on the airport website; neither has the agenda for the last scheduled ACC meeting on 23 October.

I'll give it until Friday and if necessary chase them up again.

With no e mail reply it wonders what the airport has to hide. Not every thing in these meetings are sensitive reports,there has to be reports in there that are not sensitive. I do hope you get an answer of some kind.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

With no e mail reply it wonders what the airport has to hide. Not every thing in these meetings are sensitive reports,there has to be reports in there that are not sensitive. I do hope you get an answer of some kind.

In fairness, the responsible authority for this is the ACC, not the airport. The committee has an independent chairman and the airport representative is the CEO, but he is just one of a number of representatives from various organisations on the committee; organisations such as the local authorities in the area, parish councils, TUC, CBI, Business West, ABTA, airlines operating from the airport. That said, ACCs are the DfT's preferred method for airports to communicate with their local communities about the impact of their operations.

The email contact address on the ACC page on the airport website has always been answered by the ACC secretariat when I've contacted them in the past.

It's like so many things in life these days. The means of communication have never before been so instant and so widely available, yet the actual communication from so many organisations is often dire to non-existent.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

I'm still waiting for a reply to my email of 24 October from the ACC secretariat. Minutes for the 24 July meeting have still not appeared on the airport website; neither has the agenda for the last scheduled ACC meeting on 23 October.

I'll give it until Friday and if necessary chase them up again.

I sent a chase-up email to the ACC secretariat on 1 November but am still awaiting a reply to either of my emails. The airport website is still not showing the minutes of the 24 July meeting, nor the agenda or minutes of the last scheduled meeting on 23 October (wouldn't expect the minutes of this meeting to be displayed yet though).

It's disappointing that my emails have been ignored when there is a clear invitation on the ACC section of the airport website for any queries relating to the committee to be sent to them via the email address I've been using.

I won't be giving up. I've sent a third email this evening. If I hear nothing by the middle of next week I shall send a message to the airport asking the airport CEO to be made aware that his airport is not complying with DfT guidelines when it comes to communicating openly and effectively with his local communities about the impact of airport operations with, in the DfT's view, ACCs a well-established method of discharging that obligation. Not that I expect any communication from me to actually reach the airport CEO, unlike in the days of Les Wilson when he would always reply personally.