DOCSLIB.ORG

Taking Britain Further Heathrow’S Plan for Connecting the UK to Growth

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

V O L U M E 1

Taking Britain further

Heathrow’s plan for connecting the UK to growth

#BritainsHeathrow

Disclaimer

This document has been prepared by Heathrow Airport Limited solely in response to an invitation from the Airports Commission. It should not be used for any other purpose or in any other context and Heathrow Airport Limited accepts no responsibility for its use in that regard

Contents

Volume 1 - Technical submission

Contents ........................................................................................................................ 3 Foreword ....................................................................................................................... 8 Executive Summary ................................................................................................... 11

Connecting for growth ................................................................................................................... 12 Listening to what our stakeholders say ........................................................................................... 18 Our vision for a world-class hub airport........................................................................................... 20 Connecting all of the UK ................................................................................................................ 24 Building a sustainable Heathrow ..................................................................................................... 29 The deliverable solution .................................................................................................................. 34

Part 1 – Connecting for growth ............................................................................... 41

1.1 Connecting for growth ........................................................................................................ 41 1.2 Unique role of a hub airport ................................................................................................. 44 1.3 Why hubs matter ................................................................................................................. 47 1.4 Direct flights support economic growth ............................................................................... 56 1.5 Britain as a competitive hub.................................................................................................. 62 1.6 Heathrow is the best option ................................................................................................. 66 1.7 Heathrow delivers the greatest socio-economic benefits....................................................... 78 1.8 Meeting the Commission’s objectives.................................................................................... 98
References .......................................................................................................................... 100

© Heathrow Airport LImited 2014

Taking Britain further | Page 3

Part 2 – What our stakeholders say ....................................................................... 103

2.1 What our stakeholders say ................................................................................................. 103 2.2 What our local communities say .........................................................................................104 2.3 2.4 2.5
What our local businesses say ........................................................................................... 115 What the regions say ........................................................................................................ 121 What our passengers say .................................................................................................. 130
2.6 What our airlines say .......................................................................................................... 141 2.7 What our statutory stakeholders say .................................................................................. 144 2.8 What elected representatives say ....................................................................................... 145
References ......................................................................................................................... 147

Part 3 – Our vision for a world class hub .............................................................. 149

3.1 Our vision for a world-class hub airport ............................................................................. 149 3.2 Planning for growth ........................................................................................................... 156 3.3 How our scheme has changed ........................................................................................... 160 3.4 Airfield................................................................................................................................ 171 3.5 Airspace ............................................................................................................................. 176 3.6 Single airport campus ........................................................................................................ 181 3.7 Transfers ............................................................................................................................. 185 3.8 Integrated transport............................................................................................................ 190

  • 3.9
  • Land use planning.............................................................................................................. 193

3.10 Green space........................................................................................................................ 199 3.11 Future flexibility................................................................................................................... 201
References .......................................................................................................................... 203

Part 4 – Connecting all of the UK ........................................................................... 205

4.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 205 4.2 Our surface access strategy................................................................................................. 211 4.3 Connectivity benefits ......................................................................................................... 225 4.4 Surface access demand and mode share ............................................................................ 232 4.5 Capacity assessment .......................................................................................................... 237
References ......................................................................................................................... 243

Page 4 | Taking Britain further

© Heathrow Airport LImited 2014

Part 5 – A new approach to sustainabilty ............................................................. 245

5.1 A sustainable Heathrow ..................................................................................................... 245 5.2 A quieter Heathrow ............................................................................................................ 251 5.3 Improving air quality .......................................................................................................... 268 5.4 Quality of life ..................................................................................................................... 276 5.5 Enhancing the natural environment ................................................................................... 286 5.6 Understanding our heritage ............................................................................................... 310 5.7 Managing our carbon......................................................................................................... 318 5.8 A resource efficient Heathrow ............................................................................................ 323 5.9 Sustainable drainage .......................................................................................................... 327 5.10 Dealing with existing contamination .................................................................................. 332
References ......................................................................................................................... 335

Part 6 – The deliverable solution ........................................................................... 337

6.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 337 6.2 Funding plans .................................................................................................................... 340 6.3 Our timetable .................................................................................................................... 354 6.4 Obtaining consent ............................................................................................................. 367 6.5 Consultation & engagement .............................................................................................. 377 6.6 Transition ........................................................................................................................... 381 6.7 How we innovate ............................................................................................................... 387 6.8 Engineering plans .............................................................................................................. 395 6.9 Our procurement approach ................................................................................................ 415 6.10 Construction ...................................................................................................................... 419 6.11 Britain’s choice ................................................................................................................... 424
References ......................................................................................................................... 434

Part 7 – Glossary of terms ....................................................................................... 435 Part 8 – Components reference guide to Airports Commission appraisal framework objectives ............................................................................... 445

© Heathrow Airport LImited 2014

Taking Britain further | Page 5

Volume 2 - A4 appendices to Technical submission

12345
Employment impacts for growth at Heathrow Impact of Airport Expansion options on competition and choice The importance of air freight to the UK economy Shaping Heathrow’s north- west runway proposal report on public consultation NATS Third party risk contours and public safety zones for three runways and 740k forecast movements at Heathrow

  • 6
  • Heathrow Employment Survey

Volume 3 - A3 appendices to Technical submission

  • 7
  • Our vision for a world class hub - Daylight

  • 8
  • Our vision for a world class hub - Dusk

  • 9
  • Our vision for a world class hub - Integrated Transport hub

  • Refreshed north west masterplan
  • 10

  • 11
  • Refreshed north west masterplan: Sub-surface layout

12a Refreshed north west masterplan: Minimum connection time summary – Intra-terminal 12b Refreshed north west masterplan: Minimum connection time summary – Inter-terminal 13 14 15
Refreshed north west masterplan: Terminal and apron sizing summary Cost Plan Summary Refreshed north west masterplan: M25 Junction 14/14a/15 Layout
15a Refreshed north west masterplan: M25 profile 15b Refreshed north west masterplan: Junction 15 link profiles 15c. Refreshed north west masterplan: A4 profile sheet 1 15d Refreshed north west masterplan: A4 profile sheet 2 15e Refreshed north west masterplan: M25 operating concept

  • 15f
  • Refreshed north west masterplan: M25 and rivers cross sections

15g Refreshed north west masterplan: M25 signage proposals

Page 6 | Taking Britain further

© Heathrow Airport LImited 2014

15h Refreshed north west masterplan: Junction 14 geometric planning 16 Refreshed north west masterplan: Earthworks overall cut and fill balance 16a Refreshed north west masterplan: Earthworks section A-A proposed Runway 3 profile 16b Refreshed north west masterplan: Earthworks section B-B M25 alignment 16c Refreshed north west masterplan: Earthworks section C-C Apron 6 16d Refreshed north west masterplan: Earthworks section D-D T5/T6 Spur to M25 Junction 14a 17 18
Summary of key mitigation measures Minimise total people overflown - change in noise level using the summer LAeq, 16hr metric within the “area of interest” between 2011 and 2030

19

20
Minimise new people overflown - change in noise level using the summer LAeq, 16hr metric within the “area of interest” between 2011 and 2030

Maximise respite for those people overflown - change in noise level using the summer LAeq, 16hr metric within the “area of interest” between 2011 and 2030

21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36
Plan of Harmondsworth showing Residential Properties Plan of Sipson showing Residential Properties Illustrative Landscape Masterplan Key Rivers and Associated Environment Agency Flood Zones Flood Risk Mitigation Strategy Illustrative Sections through Enhanced New Areas of Colne Valley Park WFD River Waterbody Status European Wildlife Sites Influence of Mitigation Strategy on River Flows Designated Wildlife Sites Registered Parks and Gardens within the Projected Area of Operation Designated Heritage Assets and Extents of Historic Extractive Activities Designated Heritage Assets and Extents of Historic Extractive Activities Designated Heritage Assets and Extents of Historic Extractive Activities Drainage Strategy Layout Plan Construction Schedule

© Heathrow Airport LImited 2014

Taking Britain further | Page 7

Foreword

Connections to long-haul markets are important to Britain’s competitiveness. The fastest growing markets of the next 50 years will be in Asia, Latin America and North America while traditional markets in Europe face a slower growth future.

Heathrow today is one of the biggest and, according to passengers, one of the best airports in the world. Over the last ten years we have used over £11 billion of private investment to transform Heathrow into a national asset of which Britain can be proud.

That is why our competitors are investing in their airports, and in one type of airport in particular – the hub. Hub airports are the only airports that support frequent and direct long-haul flights. By combining transfer passengers, direct passengers and freight they are able to fill long-haul aircraft and serve destinations that cannot be served by airports which rely on local demand alone.

For 350 years the world’s largest port or international airport has been in Britain. Today, that source of competitive advantage is being gradually eroded. The Airports Commission process is the last and best chance for Britain to take action to maintain its global connections before it is too late.

This is why Heathrow, as the UK’s only hub, accounts for only around 20% of the flights from the UK but nearly 80% of long-haul flights. Having a successful hub airport is uniquely important for reaching the markets that are critical to Britain’s economic future.

There are only six airports in the world that have more than 50 long-haul routes. Heathrow is one of them. But while Britain has good air connections today, it has not invested in the capacity it needs for the future. For 50 years the debate about new runways has been beset by delay, prevarication and indecision. Now, our hub airport is running at 98% capacity and growth can’t wait.

The UK is in a global competition for trade, jobs and economic growth. Direct flights support the economic growth that Britain needs. They support exports to fast-growing markets, make the UK a more attractive location for business, and bring tourists to our shores.

In 2010, Heathrow received a very clear message from all three major party leaders – “We reject your plans for a third runway”. We accepted this and stopped work on our proposals. The economic case for Britain was strong, but we had not developed a good enough solution on aircraft noise, compensation or environmental impacts. The establishment of the Airports Commission put the issue of airport capacity back on the political agenda. But we have been clear that any option needed to be significantly different from what was previously rejected.

We have listened to people - local residents, local businesses, national businesses, local politicians, MPs around the country, airlines, our employees - about what was wrong with our previous plans and what they would want to see in any revised proposal.

Page 8 | Taking Britain further

© Heathrow Airport LImited 2014

We called our submission to the Airports Commission last July “A New Approach”. It was a very consciously chosen title. Compared to the 2007 proposal, our new plans deliver greater benefits with fewer impacts. They will generate more jobs, have more capacity for freight exports, and link every region of the UK to growth while seeing fewer people affected by noise, fewer homes demolished, and providing new green space for local residents. We will continue to listen to those with an interest in our plans.
Only Heathrow will connect every part of Britain to every part of the world.

Heathrow will take British people and businesses farther with the long-haul routes it provides that no other UK airport can.

Heathrow will also take Britain further by supporting the trade, inbound tourism and investment that will deliver the jobs and economic growth we need.

Now more than ever Britain needs to be connected. Instead, with each passing year we are cutting ourselves off from jobs and growth.
Britain faces a choice. Heathrow is one of the world’s most successful hub airports. We can decide to build on this strength. Or we can start again from scratch with a new hub or gamble on uncertain alternative airport models. Building on our existing strength at Heathrow will connect the whole of the UK to growth, keep Britain as an ambitious global nation and help the UK win the global race. Starting from scratch will see the UK fall behind.
It’s time to have the vision and the courage to connect Britain to the growth it needs.

It’s time for a third runway at Heathrow.

John Holland-Kaye, CEO Designate

© Heathrow Airport LImited 2014

Taking Britain further | Page 9

This page is intentionally blank

Executive summary

Executive summary

Taking Britain further – Only Heathrow will connect the whole of the UK to growth.

The UK is engaged in a global race for jobs and economic growth. As an island trading nation, for us growth has always meant trading with the world. As the global economy changes, trade will increase with nations further afield. Connections to the great centres of the world economy are essential to support trade with our markets. Long haul connections are even more critical. A successful hub airport is uniquely valuable because it is the most certain way to deliver the connectivity we need to compete. Heathrow embraces competition, including expanding point-to-point airports elsewhere in the UK. Yet the UK urgently needs capacity at its hub airport to win the global race.

We already have a successful hub airport. As the most efficient two-runway airport with world-beating terminals, Heathrow is a national asset of which we can be proud. Building on Heathrow’s strength, the UK can compete with its rivals to win the race for connectivity. Heathrow is in the right place to take Britain further - by road, rail or air. A globally competitive hub can be built quickly with private investment. We have developed our plans to reflect our commitment to deliver expansion sustainably and fairly. We will continue to listen to improve our plans further.

The UK must act now to secure its global hub status. Alternatives risk the UK losing its long held position at the centre of world connectivity. Heathrow’s proposal is the credible, deliverable option to ensure the UK’s connectivity to the world. Ours is a £15.6 billion private investment that provides new capacity by 2025. We will create 123,000 new jobs, £100 billion in value for the UK and connect the UK to 40 new destinations by the 2030s. At the same time we will reduce aircraft noise by 30% compared to today, delivering the lowest noise levels since the 1960s. The idea has support with 48% of local people backing Heathrow expansion against 34% who oppose.

The growth at Heathrow will benefit the whole country. It is time to make a positive decision for all of Britain. Only Heathrow can take the whole of the UK further.

© Heathrow Airport Limited 2014

Taking Britain further – Executive summary Page 11

Connecting for growth

“Now more than ever the
UK needs to maintain its hub status as the balance of world economy shifts”

The international economy is changing. While emerging markets such as Brazil, Russia, India and China are rapidly expanding, traditional markets in Europe are facing a future of slower growth.

In the decades ahead, McKinsey forecasts that the distribution of upper and middle-income households will shift towards emerging economies. Europe and North America will fall from 66% of such households in 2011 to only 43% in 2030. Only 13% of world GDP will be in western Europe, down from 19% as recently as 2010. The UK is in a global race to improve its links with these emerging economies in particular. We need to stay in that race for connectivity to win the trade, jobs and future economic growth that will otherwise go to international competitors.
Our rivals are seeking precisely the benefits of international connectivity from which we have benefited. They are investing heavily in air connectivity, particularly long haul connections, as a key to competing in the global race for jobs and economic growth.

Recommended publications
  • Heathrow Economics Study Expansion of Heathrow Airport

    Heathrow Economics Study Expansion of Heathrow Airport

    Heathrow Economics Study Expansion of Heathrow airport GLA September 2006 Heathrow Economics Study Expansion of Heathrow airport Heathrow Economics Study Expansion of Heathrow airport Contents Page FOREWORD I SUMMARY II Background ii Methodology ii Main Findings ii 1. INTRODUCTION 3 1.1 Background 3 1.2 Objective of the study 3 1.3 Methodology 4 1.4 Structure of report 4 2. TRANSPORT COSTS AND BENEFITS 5 2.1 Introduction 5 2.2 General Assumptions 5 2.3 Passenger Demand Forecasts 7 2.4 Capacity Constraint 8 2.5 Benefits 10 2.6 Costs 12 2.7 Government Revenue 12 2.8 Conclusions 13 3. WIDER ECONOMIC BENEFITS 14 3.1 Introduction 14 3.2 Employment and regeneration 14 3.3 Agglomeration (Productivity and Business) 15 3.4 Tourism 15 3.5 Conclusion 15 4. EFFECTS ON THE SCALE OF CAPACITY REQUIRED 17 4.1 Introduction 17 4.2 Transport appraisal 17 4.3 Making more efficient use of existing capacity 17 4.4 Conclusion 20 5. EFFECTS ON THE CHOICE OF LOCATION 21 5.1 Introduction 21 5.2 Transport benefits 21 5.3 Environmental issues 22 5.4 The need for a transport hub 22 5.5 Conclusion 23 6. IMPACT ON THE AVIATION INDUSTRY AND REGIONS 24 6.1 Introduction 24 6.2 The impact of a third runway at Heathrow compared to an additional runway elsewhere in the South East 24 6.3 The impact of providing additional capacity in the South East compared to constrained capacity 24 Heathrow Economics Study Expansion of Heathrow airport 6.4 Conclusion 25 7.
  • Systems Integration at London Heathrow Terminal 5

    Systems Integration at London Heathrow Terminal 5

    CMR 420, 02/01/09 Winter 2009 | Vol.51, No.2 | REPRINT SERIES CaliforniaReview Management Innovation in Megaprojects: Systems Integration at London Heathrow Terminal 5 Andrew Davies David Gann Tony Douglas © 2009 by The Regents of the University of California Innovation in Megaprojects: SYSTEMS INTEGRATION AT LONDON HEATHROW TERMINAL 5 Andrew Davies David Gann Tony Douglas growing number of infrastructure projects are being proposed and built throughout the world. A megaproject is an investment of $1B or more to build the physical infrastructures that enable people, resources, and information to move within buildings and betweenA locations throughout the world. Organizations responsible for produc- ing megaprojects face a “performance paradox.” Despite the growth in number and opportunities to benefit from learning, megaprojects continue to have poor performance records.1 Most are unsuccessful measured against their original time, cost, quality, and safety objectives, as well as their expected revenue predictions. The construction of airport infrastructure provides examples of how megaprojects can go wrong. When Denver’s $5B international airport opened in 1995, it was almost 200 per cent over the original budget, 16 months late, and passenger traffic achieved only half the predicted revenues. The opening of the airport was plagued by problems with the baggage handling system, which was eventually abandoned in August 2005. Although Hong Kong’s $20B Chek Lap Kok airport opened on time in July 1998, severe disruptions were experienced for six months after opening due to computer problems with the baggage han- dling system. The authors thank Jennifer Whyte, Catelijne Coopmans, and Tim Brady, who worked on a larger study of the T5 project with us, and four anonymous referees who helped to develop our conceptual approach.
  • The Future of BAA

    The Future of BAA

    House of Commons Transport Committee The future of BAA Fourth Report of Session 2007–08 Report, together with formal minutes, oral and written evidence Ordered by The House of Commons to be printed 5 March 2008 HC 119 Published on 14 March 2008 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £0.00 The Transport Committee The Transport Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration and policy of the Department for Transport and its associated public bodies. Current membership Mrs Gwyneth Dunwoody MP (Labour, Crewe and Nantwich) (Chairman) Mr David Clelland MP (Labour, Tyne Bridge) Clive Efford MP (Labour, Eltham) Mrs Louise Ellman MP (Labour/Co-operative, Liverpool Riverside) Mr Philip Hollobone MP (Conservative, Kettering) Mr John Leech MP (Liberal Democrat, Manchester, Withington) Mr Eric Martlew MP (Labour, Carlisle) Mr Lee Scott MP (Conservative, Ilford North) David Simpson MP (Democratic Unionist, Upper Bann) Mr Graham Stringer MP (Labour, Manchester Blackley) Mr David Wilshire MP (Conservative, Spelthorne) Powers The Committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the Internet via www.parliament.uk. Publications The Reports and evidence of the Committee are published by The Stationery Office by Order of the House. All publications of the Committee (including press notices) are on the Internet at www.parliament.uk/transcom. Committee staff The current staff of the Committee are Tom Healey (Clerk), Annette Toft (Second Clerk), Richard Ward (Assistant Clerk, Scrutiny Unit), David Davies (Committee Specialist), Tim Steer (Committee Specialist), Alison Mara (Committee Assistant), Ronnie Jefferson (Secretary), Gaby Henderson (Senior Office Clerk) and Laura Kibby (Media Officer).
  • South West Herts Economy Study

    South West Herts Economy Study

    South West Hertfordshire Economic Study A Final Report by Regeneris Consulting and GL Hearn South West Hertfordshire Councils South West Hertfordshire Economic Study February 2016 Regeneris Consulting Ltd www.regeneris.co.uk South West Hertfordshire Economic Study Contents Page Executive Summary i Purpose of the Study and Approach i Functional Economic Market Area (FEMA) i Policy Context ii Economic Baseline ii Market Assessment iii Growth Scenarios iv 1. Introduction and Purpose of Study 1 2. Defining the Functional Economic Area 4 Housing Market Area 6 Local Enterprise Partnership Geographies 9 Flow of Goods, Services and Information 13 Service Market for Consumers 16 Cultural and Social Well-Being Catchments 19 Transport Network 21 Future Considerations 22 The FEMA of South West Herts 24 3. Policy Context 27 4. The South West Herts Economy: An Overview 37 Size of the South West Herts Economy 37 Geography of the South-West Hertfordshire Economy 39 Recent Economic Performance 41 Labour Market 44 Broad Sectoral Composition 46 Sector Strengths 49 Structure of Business Base 57 Enterprise 60 5. Commercial Property Market Assessment 63 South West Hertfordshire Economic Study National Economic Conditions 63 Office Market Review 63 Industrial Sector Review 71 Commercial Agents Consultations 76 Summary 78 6. Future Growth Scenarios 80 Higher Growth Scenario 102 Conclusions on Preferred Scenario 108 7. Relationship with London 111 Introduction 111 Migration 112 8. Supply of Employment Land 120 Introduction 120 Site Assessment Methodology 120 Sites in Dacorum 122 Sites in Hertsmere 124 Sites in St Albans 141 Sites in Three Rivers 145 Sites in Watford 151 Conclusion 158 9.
  • The Business of Heathrow Airport Limited

    The Business of Heathrow Airport Limited

    CAP 1133 Appendix C: The business of Heathrow Airport Limited APPENDIX C The business of Heathrow Airport Limited C1 This appendix provides an overview of the current ownership and history of Heathrow and the business of Heathrow Airport Limited (HAL). In particular, this appendix examines the: . services HAL provides to different users; and . sources of HAL's revenue. The ownership of Heathrow C2 Heathrow is owned by Heathrow Airport Holdings Limited (previously BAA), which is privately managed on behalf of its shareholders, with the major shareholders currently being: . FGP Topco Limited, a consortium owned and led by the infrastructure specialist Ferrovial S.A.– 33.6 per cent; . Qatar Holding LLC – 20.0 per cent; . Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec –13.3 per cent; . the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation – 11.9 per cent; . Alinda Capital Partners –11.2 per cent; and . China Investment Corporation – 10 per cent.1 The development of Heathrow2 C3 Heathrow has two parallel east-west runways and is located around 14 miles west of London.3 It sits on a site that covers 1,227 hectares. C4 The airport started operations in 1930 as a private airport to assemble and test aircraft. 1 HAL, Company Information, http://www.heathrowairport.com/about-us/company-news-and- information/company-information (accessed 30 October 2013). 2 HAL, http://www.heathrowairport.com/about-us/facts-and-figures/heathrow's-history (accessed 30 October 2012). 3 Liaison Group of UK Airport consultative committees, http://www.ukaccs.info/profiles.htm#LHR (accessed 20 December 2012). 1 CAP 1133 Appendix C: The business of Heathrow Airport Limited C5 In 1944, as part of the World War Two war effort, it was requisitioned by the Air Ministry for development into a Royal Air Force transport base.
  • The Role of Accessibility in Passengers' Choice of Airports

    The Role of Accessibility in Passengers' Choice of Airports

    JOINT TRANSPORT RESEARCH CENTRE Discussion Paper No. 2008-14 August 2008 The Role of Accessibility in Passengers' Choice of Airports Marco KOUWENHOVEN Significance The Hague, Netherlands JOINT TRANSPORT RESEARCH CENTRE Discussion Paper No. 2008-14 Prepared for the Round Table of 2-3 October 2008 on Airline Competition, Systems of Airports and Intermodal Connections The Role of Accessibility in Passengers' Choice of Airports Marco KOUWENHOVEN Significance The Hague Netherlands August 2008 The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent positions of Significance, the OECD or the International Transport Forum. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 5 1.1. Growth of regional airports .............................................................................. 5 1.2. Implications for policy makers ......................................................................... 6 1.3. Objective of this paper ..................................................................................... 7 2. DEFINITIONS OF ACCESSIBILITY ........................................................................... 8 3. ACCESS MODE CHOICE .......................................................................................... 9 3.1. Observed access mode shares ....................................................................... 9 3.2. Factors influencing access mode choice behaviour .....................................
  • Supplementary Report: Commercial and Financial Analysis of the Iog Option Based on KPMG’S Analysis

    Supplementary Report: Commercial and Financial Analysis of the Iog Option Based on KPMG’S Analysis

    Inner Thames Estuary Feasibility Study Response to Airports Commission Call for Evidence The Mayor of London’s Submission: Supporting technical documents 23 May 2014 Title: Supplementary Report: Commercial and Financial Analysis of the IoG option based on KPMG’s analysis Author: Ernst and Young (EY) Purpose of paper: To identify the key assumptions used in the Airports Commission’s / KPMG’s analysis of the commercial viability of an Inner Thames Estuary hub airport, and adjust this analysis in light of market practice and precedents of regulated airports and other utilities. Key message: The threefold increase in landing charges claimed by the Airports Commission is a significant overestimate, and based on flawed financial and commercial assumptions. Isle of Grain Hub Airport Supplementary Report: Commercial and Financial Analysis of the IoG option based on KPMG’s analysis 22 May 2014 Ernst & Young LLP Ernst & Young LLP Tel: + 44 207 951 2000 1 More London Place Fax: + 44 207 951 1345 London ey.com SE1 2AF Tel: 023 8038 2000 Transport for London 22 May 2014 Windsor House 42-50 Victoria Street, London SW1H 0TL Dear Sirs, A new Hub airport – the required increase in aeronautical charges In accordance with our appointment to provide services under the terms and conditions of our Framework Agreement with TfL (reference number TfL 90400), we have prepared this supporting document as per TfL’s instructions to perform a high level financial analysis to identify the key assumptions used in AC/KPMG’s analysis of the commercial viability of the IoG Hub. Then, based on market practice and precedents of regulated airports and other utilities, adjust AC/KPMG’s analysis.
  • Why Some Airport-Rail Links Get Built and Others Do Not: the Role of Institutions, Equity and Financing

    Why Some Airport-Rail Links Get Built and Others Do Not: the Role of Institutions, Equity and Financing

    Why some airport-rail links get built and others do not: the role of institutions, equity and financing by Julia Nickel S.M. in Engineering Systems- Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2010 Vordiplom in Wirtschaftsingenieurwesen- Universität Karlsruhe, 2007 Submitted to the Department of Political Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Political Science at the MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY February 2011 © Massachusetts Institute of Technology 2011. All rights reserved. Author . Department of Political Science October 12, 2010 Certified by . Kenneth Oye Associate Professor of Political Science Thesis Supervisor Accepted by . Roger Peterson Arthur and Ruth Sloan Professor of Political Science Chair, Graduate Program Committee 1 Why some airport-rail links get built and others do not: the role of institutions, equity and financing by Julia Nickel Submitted to the Department of Political Science On October 12, 2010, in partial fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Political Science Abstract The thesis seeks to provide an understanding of reasons for different outcomes of airport ground access projects. Five in-depth case studies (Hongkong, Tokyo-Narita, London- Heathrow, Chicago- O’Hare and Paris-Charles de Gaulle) and eight smaller case studies (Kuala Lumpur, Seoul, Shanghai-Pudong, Bangkok, Beijing, Rome- Fiumicino, Istanbul-Atatürk and Munich- Franz Josef Strauss) are conducted. The thesis builds on existing literature that compares airport-rail links by explicitly considering the influence of the institutional environment of an airport on its ground access situation and by paying special attention to recently opened dedicated airport expresses in Asia.
  • The Public Health Impact of the Buncefield Oil Depot Fire the Public Health Impact of the Buncefield Oil Depot Fire

    The Public Health Impact of the Buncefield Oil Depot Fire the Public Health Impact of the Buncefield Oil Depot Fire

    The Public Health Impact of the Buncefield Oil Depot Fire The Public Health Impact of the Buncefield Oil Depot Fire Report prepared by the Chief Executive’s Office, Health Protection Agency in collaboration with the Dacorum and Watford and Three Rivers Primary Care Trusts. Prof. Pat Troop Chief Executive, Health Protection Agency With thanks to The Buncefield Health Surveillance Steering Group and Tina Endericks, Health Protection Agency, for co-ordinating and editing this report. Please direct any queries concerning this report to: [email protected] This report is available at: www.hpa.org.uk www.watford3r-pct.nhs.uk www.dacorum-pct.nhs.uk ISBN: 0 901144 82 7 PAGES_01_TO_15 14/7/06 00:03 Page 1 T HE P UBLIC H EALTH I MPACT OF THE B UNCEFIELD O IL D EPOT F IRE - 2006 Appendix 1 Contents Chief Executive’s Foreword 3 Executive Summary 4 Summary of the Buncefield Oil Depot Fire 6 Assessing the Public Health Impact 8 Key Findings 10 Appendices 1 Environmental Impacts of the 17 Buncefield Oil Depot Explosion 2 Study of Accident and Emergency Attendances 51 in Hemel Hempstead and Watford 3 Buncefield Follow up Population Survey 71 4 Atmospheric Modelling and Monitoring 89 1 PAGES_01_TO_15 14/7/06 00:03 Page 2 T HE P UBLIC H EALTH I MPACT OF THE B UNCEFIELD O IL D EPOT F IRE - 2006 2 PAGES_01_TO_15 14/7/06 00:03 Page 3 T HE P UBLIC H EALTH I MPACT OF THE B UNCEFIELD O IL D EPOT F IRE - 2006 Chief Executive’s Foreword This report is important as it is the first time this type of public health follow-up study has been undertaken and reported following a major environmental incident in the UK.
  • Access Our Libraries Online

    Access Our Libraries Online

    News from your council September/October 2019 How we’re improving your air Access our Get involved in libraries online Recycle Week Plus refurbishments How you can on the way become a Street Champion OPEN HOUSE CULTURE BITE VOLUNTEERS advertisements people Contents September/October 2019 ▸ Cover stories 4 Heathrow expansion appeal am delighted that one of our local MPs, Boris Johnson, is Date set for fresh legal challenge. now the Prime Minister. He has already given instructions that there should be a review of the viability and value of the ▸ 12 Get involved in Recycle Week I Why it’s more important than ever. HS2 project and stated that he will be closely following the legal challenge against the proposal to expand Heathrow. An expanded Heathrow would damage our borough’s ▸ 14 We say thank you to our Street Champions Event celebrates volunteers who are the eyes and environment immensely, through the loss of homes, the ears of our community. destruction of protected habitats and an increase in air and noise pollution. It would also significantly impact the health ▸ 16 ‘Appy Families of our residents, particularly the elderly and young. Residents of all ages are enjoying our libraries’ The next stage of the legal challenge, which may take some digital services. years to conclude, will commence in the Court of Appeal on 22 ▸ 20 How we’re improving your air October where the presiding judge, overturning the decision of Find out about our air quality action plan and the Divisional Court to not grant an appeal hearing stated: “The claim your free trees.
  • Breaking New Ground 2017 Annual Report

    Breaking New Ground 2017 Annual Report

    BREAKING NEW GROUND 2017 Annual Report Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the Year Ended December 31, 2017. Our Mission Meet the critical transportation infrastructure needs of the bi-state region’s people, businesses, and visitors by providing the highest-quality and most efficient transportation and port commerce facilities and services to move people and goods within the region, provide access to the nation and the world, and promote the region’s economic development. Our mission is simple: to keep the region moving. 2 THE PORT AUTHORITY OF NY & NJ TABLE OF CONTENTS I ntroductory Section 2 Origins of The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey 3 Letter of Transmittal to the Governors 4 Board of Commissioners 5 Leadership of the Port Authority Our Core Business Imperatives 9 Investment 10 Safety and Security 11 Integrity 12 Diversity and Inclusion 13 Sustainability and Resiliency Major Milestones By Business Line 15 2017 at a Glance 16 Aviation 20 Tunnels, Bridges & Terminals 24 Port of New York and New Jersey 28 Port Authority Trans-Hudson Corporation (PATH) 30 World Trade Center Financial Section 32 Chief Financial Officer’s Letter of Transmittal to the Board of Commissioners 35 Index to Financial Section Corporate Information Section 126 Selected Statistical, Demographic, and Economic Data 127 Top 20 Salaried Staff as of December 31, 2017 The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the Year Ended December 31, 2017 Prepared by the Marketing and Comptroller’s departments of The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey 4 World Trade Center, 150 Greenwich Street, 23rd Floor, New York, NY 10007 www.panynj.gov BREAKING NEW GrounD 1 The Port District includes the cities of New York and Yonkers in New York State; the cities of Newark, Jersey City, Bayonne, Hoboken, and Elizabeth in the State of New Jersey; and more than 200 other municipalities, including all or part of 17 counties, in the two states.
  • New Dimension— Enhancing the Fire and Rescue Services' Capacity to Respond to Terrorist and Other Large-Scale Incidents

    New Dimension— Enhancing the Fire and Rescue Services' Capacity to Respond to Terrorist and Other Large-Scale Incidents

    House of Commons Public Accounts Committee New Dimension— Enhancing the Fire and Rescue Services' capacity to respond to terrorist and other large-scale incidents Tenth Report of Session 2008–09 Report, together with formal minutes, oral and written evidence Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 9 February 2009 HC 249 [Incorporating HC 1184–i, Session 2007–08] Published on 12 March 2009 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £0.00 The Public Accounts Committee The Committee of Public Accounts is appointed by the House of Commons to examine “the accounts showing the appropriation of the sums granted by Parliament to meet the public expenditure, and of such other accounts laid before Parliament as the committee may think fit” (Standing Order No 148). Current membership Mr Edward Leigh MP (Conservative, Gainsborough) (Chairman) Mr Richard Bacon MP (Conservative, South Norfolk) Angela Browning MP (Conservative, Tiverton and Honiton) Mr Paul Burstow MP (Liberal Democrat, Sutton and Cheam) Mr Douglas Carswell MP (Conservative, Harwich) Rt Hon David Curry MP (Conservative, Skipton and Ripon) Mr Ian Davidson MP (Labour, Glasgow South West) Angela Eagle MP (Labour, Wallasey) Nigel Griffiths MP (Labour, Edinburgh South) Rt Hon Keith Hill MP (Labour, Streatham) Mr Austin Mitchell MP (Labour, Great Grimsby) Dr John Pugh MP (Liberal Democrat, Southport) Geraldine Smith MP (Labour, Morecombe and Lunesdale) Rt Hon Don Touhig MP (Labour, Islwyn) Rt Hon Alan Williams MP (Labour, Swansea West) Phil Wilson MP (Labour, Sedgefield) The following member was also a member of the committee during the parliament. Mr Philip Dunne MP (Conservative, Ludlow) Powers Powers of the Committee of Public Accounts are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 148.