DOCSLIB.ORG

Heritage Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Heritage Report Gatwick Airport Limited Response to Airports Commission Consultation Appendix 16 RPS - Place: Heritage Report GATWICK TECHNICAL REPORT IN RESPONSE TO AIRPORTS COMMISSION CONSULTATION PLACE: Heritage January 2015 Our Ref: OXF8027 RPS 20 Western Avenue Milton Park Abingdon OX14 4SH rpsgroup.com QUALITY MANAGEMENT Prepared by: Mick Rawlings/Robert Masefield Authorised by: David Cowan/Julia Tindale Date: January 2015 Project Number/Document OXF8027/AC Consultation Response Reference: COPYRIGHT © RPS The material presented in this report is confidential. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Gatwick Airport Limited and shall not be distributed or made available to any other company or person without the knowledge and written consent of RPS. rpsgroup.com CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................................................... i 1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................ 1 2 GATWICK .................................................................................................................................. 2 3 HEATHROW NORTH WEST RUNWAY .................................................................................. 15 4 HEATHROW EXTENDED NORTHERN RUNWAY (ENR) ...................................................... 24 5 COMPARATIVE TABLES ....................................................................................................... 31 APPENDICES Appendix 1 Comparison Tables FIGURES Figure 1 Gatwick – N70 (20 event) contour showing heritage assets Figure 2 Heathrow NWR – N70 (20 event) contour showing heritage assets Figure 3 Heathrow ENR – N70 (20 event) contour showing heritage assets rpsgroup.com EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The heritage assessment forms part of the wider Place Assessment which covers a wide range of topics including: Heritage Waste Land Use and Land Cover Agriculture Landscape The current overall Airports Commission (AC) Sustainability Assessment of performance of the three schemes for Place is shown in the Table below: Airports Commission Sustainability Assessment of Heritage Performance AC Gatwick (Best) Heathrow ENR Heathrow NWRR Appraisal (Middle) (Worst) Framework Scores LGW + ENR + LHR NW + Base Mitigation Base Mitigation Base Mitigation Highly Supportive Supportive Neutral Neutral ? Adverse Adverse Adverse Adverse Adverse Adverse Highly Highly Adverse Adverse This executive summary provides details of the key heritage issues that have been identified from the detailed analysis of the AC’s documents and those prepared by Gatwick Airport Limited (Gatwick) and the promoters of the two Heathrow schemes i.e. the Heathrow Extended Northern Runway (ENR) and Heathrow North West Runway (NWR). Those key heritage issues include: There are substantially more designated heritage assets within 2km of the boundary of either of i rpsgroup.com the two Heathrow schemes than is the case at Gatwick; There are very substantially more designated heritage assets potentially affected by aircraft noise as a consequence of both of the Heathrow schemes than at Gatwick. Furthermore, the quality of such assets at Heathrow is significantly greater than at Gatwick; At Heathrow, the potential requirement to uncover and examine large areas of land containing significant archaeological remains poses a risk to the overall delivery programme. This is not the case at Gatwick; and There are inconsistencies and errors within the reports prepared by the AC’s consultants, which result in Gatwick being treated on a less favourable basis in comparison with the two Heathrow schemes. Settings of Heritage Assets We agree with the AC’s Business Case and Sustainability Assessments insofar as they acknowledge that, for any of the proposed schemes, designated heritage assets located outside the land take areas could be adversely affected as a result of changes to their settings. This could be visual change with regard to views of and from the heritage asset, and also changes in ground noise and airborne noise. The assessments undertaken by Jacobs for the AC show clearly that there are substantially more designated heritage assets within 2km of the boundary of either of the two Heathrow schemes than is the case at Gatwick. At Gatwick the land take boundary has been designed specifically to exclude physical impacts on two Scheduled Monuments, although it is acknowledged that there will be impacts on the settings of these two designated heritage assets. Tranquility Where Jacobs have assessed the issue of impacts on designated heritage assets resulting from changes in tranquility, there is a pronounced difference between Gatwick and the two Heathrow schemes with regard to both the quantity and quality of heritage assets that could potentially be affected. However, this has not been given appropriate weight in the overall AC assessment of each scheme. Looking just at the numbers of heritage assets that would fall within the N70 (20 event) noise contour for 2030 (as plotted by Jacobs), this shows that with a second runway at Gatwick there would be a total of 292 designated heritage assets potentially affected. The equivalent figure for the Heathrow North West Runway (NWR) scheme would be 1,954 and for Heathrow Extended Northern Runway (ENR) the figure would be 2,322. Thus the figure for Gatwick is considerably lower than for both of the two Heathrow schemes. However, it is the more qualitative aspects of these potential impacts on heritage assets as a result of changes in tranquility that are perhaps of greater importance. At Gatwick the Jacobs assessment shows that by 2030 a total of two Conservation Areas and two Scheduled Monuments would fall within this N70 (20 event) contour – but no World Heritage Sites or Registered Parks and Gardens. For the Heathrow NWR scheme the equivalent figures would be 18 Conservation Areas, eight Scheduled Monuments, one World Heritage Site and 15 Registered Parks and Gardens. For the ii rpsgroup.com Heathrow ENR scheme the figures would be 21 Conservation Areas, nine Scheduled Monuments, one World Heritage Site and 10 Registered Parks and Gardens. For the Heathrow NWR scheme, heritage assets that would fall within the N70 (20 event) noise contour include the World Heritage Site at Kew Gardens, along other heritage assets including Windsor Castle, Windsor Great Park, Frogmore House and Gardens (including the Royal Mausoleum), Eton College, Richmond Park, Osterly House and Park, Syon House and Park, Buccleuch Gardens, Ditton Park and Ankerwyke Priory. For the Heathrow ENR scheme, the N70 (20 event) noise contour plotted by Jacobs shows that many of the heritage assets identified above would also be affected to a greater or lesser extent, along with Burnham Abbey. At Runnymede Bridge, the Magna Carta Monument, the John F Kennedy Memorial and the Royal Air Force Memorial would be just outside the contour, as would Chiswick House and Gardens. For Gatwick, there are no affected heritage assets that come anywhere near the significance of those identified above. This point is clearly illustrated in Figures 1-3 of this report. Archaeology One issue that the AC may wish to address in more detail is that of the risk to the overall delivery programme which arises from having to deal with buried archaeological remains. The Gatwick submission to the AC contained a detailed appraisal of archaeological potential within the required land take and the surrounding area, whereas the promoters of the two Heathrow schemes merely presented an account of what is identified in the relevant Historic Environment Records. At Heathrow it is clear from previous investigations that any archaeological remains present could be extensive and significant – this is acknowledged in the promoter’s submission for the Heathrow NWR scheme which states that there is potential for the scheme to result in the loss of archaeological remains which would be equivalent to Scheduled Monuments in importance and value. There is a total area of 175 hectares within the land take required for the Heathrow NWR scheme that is likely to contain significant archaeological remains. In 1999, an area of 21 hectares was investigated ahead of the construction of Heathrow Terminal 5 and this was seen within the archaeological community as a major investigation that required the input of a substantial number of archaeologists from within the overall UK workforce. The potential requirement to investigate a similarly rich archaeological landscape across up to 175 hectares of land within the construction programme for the Heathrow NWR scheme must be regarded as a risk to the overall deliverability of the proposed scheme. This is because of the likely unprecedented scale of the excavations and uncertainty regarding the time necessary to complete the work to the required standard. Inconsistencies A number of inconsistencies within the assessments undertaken by Jacobs for the AC are identified in this report and in the Comparison Tables at Appendix 1. One of the more significant inconsistencies with regard to Gatwick is that the impact on one of the Scheduled Monuments outside the land take boundary has been assessed by Jacobs as being of Very Large significance after mitigation, whereas without mitigation the impact had been assessed (by Jacobs) as being of Large significance. This increase in impact significance has not been iii rpsgroup.com explained. There are other situations within the Jacobs
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Taking Britain Further Heathrow’S Plan for Connecting the UK to Growth
    VOLUME 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 .................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • COLNE VALLEY – LANDSCAPE on the EDGE Landscape Conservation Action Plan - March 2018
    COLNE VALLEY – LANDSCAPE ON THE EDGE Landscape Conservation Action Plan - March 2018 Chair of Landscape Partnership Lead Partner Colne Valley Park Community Interest Company Friends of the Colne Valley Park Spelthorne Natural History Society Front cover photo of Stockers Lake – Greg Townsend provide an essential project management tool for effective and efficient delivery. The partnership involved in preparing this LCAP considers it to be a compelling, innovative and realistic bid, with a range of projects which will connect people, biodiversity and access. ‘Colne Valley – Landscape on the Edge’ meets all the objectives of the Heritage Lottery Landscape The Landscape Partnership programme, run by the Heritage Lottery Partnership programme, with each of the projects proposed under the Fund, seeks to ‘conserve areas of distinctive landscape character’ and Scheme meeting at least one objective. promote a ‘holistic and balanced approach to the management of landscape heritage at a landscape scale’. Landscape Conservation Action Covering parts of Berkshire, Buckinghamshire, Greater London, Plans (LCAPs) required as part of this programme, provide the foundation Hertfordshire and Surrey, ‘Colne Valley – Landscape on the Edge’ will for planned work to benefit heritage, people and communities and are harness and stimulate organisations and communities across the area to needed in order to secure the Heritage Lottery Fund grant towards the support and sustain delivery. Residents and visitors will gain positive proposed work. perceptions about the area, will learn more about the landscape and feel more confident about exploring it. They will be supported to assist in Our LCAP, ‘Colne Valley – Landscape on the Edge’, comprises a suite of ‘shaping their place’, and feel more motivated to venture out and enjoy exciting projects (the Scheme), and seeks to: set these in the landscape the area, and to participate in efforts to improve and maintain it.
    [Show full text]
  • Consultation Response on Draft Airports National Policy Statement
    Consultation Response on Draft Airports National Policy Statement On behalf of: London Borough of Hillingdon London Borough of Richmond London Borough of Wandsworth Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead 25 May 2017 Contents 1. Foreword ....................................................................................... 1 2. Summary ....................................................................................... 3 3. Question 1 ..................................................................................... 5 4. Question 2 ..................................................................................... 7 5. Question 3 ................................................................................... 25 6. Question 4 ................................................................................... 33 7. Question 5 ................................................................................... 37 8. Question 6 ................................................................................... 51 9. Question 7 ................................................................................... 53 10. Question 8 ................................................................................... 65 11. Statement of Facts and Grounds, dated 8 December 2016 setting out the law on air quality and other background ............................. 73 12. Witness Statement of Cllr Ray Puddifoot MBE, dated 8 December 2016, setting out the history of Heathrow and other relevant background ...............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Airport Expansion Consultation Document
    AIRPORT EXPANSION CONSULTATION DOCUMENT JANUARY 2018 Page 2 Contents Contents Page 1. Heathrow Expansion 2 2. Our Emerging Plans 12 2.1 Runway 14 2.2 Terminals, Satellites and Aprons 18 2.3 Taxiways 20 2.4 M25 Alignment 23 2.5 M25 Junctions 25 2.6 Local Roads 26 2.7 River Diversions and Flood Storage 32 2.8 Airport Supporting Facilities 36 2.9 Land Uses Affected by Expansion 38 2.10 Airport Related Development 40 2.11 Construction 42 3. Around the Airport 44 4. Managing the Effects of Expansion 48 4.1 Property Compensation, Property Hardship, 48 Land Acquisition 4.2 Noise 50 4.3 Surface Access 54 4.4 Air Quality and Emissions 58 4.5 Carbon and Climate Change 60 4.6 Natural Environment 62 4.7 Historic Environment 64 5. Have Your Say 66 Page 1 Foreword Heathrow is a critical part of the UK economy, but its expansion is also vital to securing the country’s economic future as an outward looking nation. This consultation is a central part of delivering that plan. It is We want our local communities to share in the benefits of your opportunity to share your views on the options for how Heathrow’s growth. Expansion will create up to 40,000 jobs we expand. Your feedback will inform a second consultation in the local area and create a wealth of new opportunities next year where we will present detailed plans and again ask for local businesses. Thousands of young people will have a for your views before finalising our proposals.
    [Show full text]
  • Parliamentary Debates (Hansard)
    Tuesday Volume 528 24 May 2011 No. 163 HOUSE OF COMMONS OFFICIAL REPORT PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES (HANSARD) Tuesday 24 May 2011 £5·00 © Parliamentary Copyright House of Commons 2011 This publication may be reproduced under the terms of the Parliamentary Click-Use Licence, available online through The National Archives website at www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/information-management/our-services/parliamentary-licence-information.htm Enquiries to The National Archives, Kew, Richmond, Surrey TW9 4DU; e-mail: [email protected] 757 24 MAY 2011 758 The Deputy Prime Minister (Mr Nick Clegg): Ihave House of Commons received many representations expressing a wide variety of views— Tuesday 24 May 2011 Mr Speaker: Order. I believe the Deputy Prime Minister is seeking a grouping. The House met at half-past Eleven o’clock The Deputy Prime Minister: Yes, forgive me. [HON. MEMBERS: “Oh!”] I would like to group questions 3, 4, 5, PRAYERS 11 and 12. A major issue—my omission to group the questions. That is how over-excited Members on the Opposition Benches get. [MR SPEAKER in the Chair] 4. Charlie Elphicke (Dover) (Con): What recent representations he has received on his proposals for Oral Answers to Questions House of Lords reform. [56962] 5. Mr Ben Bradshaw (Exeter) (Lab): What recent representations he has received on his proposals for reform of the House of Lords. [56963] DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER 11. Mr Alan Reid (Argyll and Bute) (LD): What The Deputy Prime Minister was asked— representations he has received on his plans for the future composition of the House of Lords. [56969] Disabled People (Elected Office) 12.
    [Show full text]
  • Summer with the Colne Valley
    Newsletter Summer 2021 FREE COLNE VALLEY PARK FESTIVAL FORTNIGHT Festival Fortnight will be a fantastic programme of events between Saturday July 24th to Sunday August 8th 2021, so please put the date in your diary. Check on our website and social media channels to see what will be on offer, including guided walks, special events, informative talks and children’s activities See below for more details. Harmondsworth Great Barn. Welcome to Summer with the Colne Valley ummer has finally arrived, and it is time amongst others, and include to get out, explore and really enjoy the recruiting more than 90 volunteer Slocal countryside on your doorstep. River Rangers to help care for the The Colne Valley Park has a truly wonderful major rivers in the Park; establishing variety of landscapes and places to visit, ranging three new conservation grazing Blue from woodlands to Country Parks and from areas with lots of lovely cows to help Butterfly hidden nature reserves to tranquil lakes and encourage new wildlife; working water courses. There are also some stunning with the local Wildlife Trust to enhance habitats views and walks. for Water Voles; transforming council-owned Our aim is to help protect and improve areas into community green spaces for local the local countryside and its biodiversity and residents; improving direction signs for walks landscapes, as well as helping local people and many other river conservation and habitat discover more of the Park. We are working on improvement programmes. a wide programme of projects, all designed to enhance the Colne Valley Park countryside for You can read about these important projects the benefit of people and wildlife.
    [Show full text]
  • EC Harris - Heathrow NWR Critique
    Gatwick Airport Limited Response to Airports Commission Consultation Appendix 31 EC Harris - Heathrow NWR Critique GATWICK AIRPORT LIMITED HEATHROW NORTH WEST RUNWAY CRITIQUE PROGRAMME & COST REVIEW REPORT LEGALLY PRIVILEGED & STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL JANUARY 2015 Legally Privileged & Strictly Confidential Intentionally left blank © 2014 EC Harris LLP Legally Privileged & Strictly Confidential CONTACTS PAUL WILLIS GLOBAL HEAD OF AVIATION EC HARRIS LLP 34 YORK WAY LONDON N1 9AB TELEPHONE : +44 (0) 207 832 2273 UK MOBILE : +44 (0) 7826 535 496 EMAIL : PAUL .WILLIS @ECHARRIS .COM www.echarris.com An ARCADIS Company EC Harris LLP is part of the ARCADIS Group of Companies © 2014 EC Harris LLP Legally Privileged & Strictly Confidential Intentionally left blank © 2014 EC Harris LLP Legally Privileged & Strictly Confidential CONTENTS 1. Executive Summary ..................................................................... 1 1.1 Overview ..................................................................................... 1 1.1.1 CAPEX Shortfall ......................................................................... 2 1.1.2 Programme Risks & Timetable Delays ....................................... 5 2. Key Findings & Issues................................................................. 9 2.1 Introduction ................................................................................. 9 2.2 Heathrow NWR Scheme Description .......................................... 9 2.3 Land use Planning ...................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Hillingdon Conservation Council Minutes 16Th June 1998 Page 1 Jon Finney Introduced This Item, Which Would Form the Theme for Meetings to Be Held in the Coming Year
    HILLINGDON CONSERVATION COUNCIL Meeting held at Manor Farm House on Tuesday 16th June 1998 at 7.30pm Councillor Graham Horn (Chairman) Present : Michael Hirst Canal Locks Panel Audrey Wormold Hillingdon Village Panel Sheila Liberty Eastcote Village Panel Clive Pigram Ruislip Panel Kenneth Wintle Ruislip Panel David Horne Councillor Elma Hutton Ruislip Panel Eileen Bowlt Ruislip Panel Robert Bedford Ruislip Panel Robert Whytehead Archaeologist, English Heritage (West London) Colin Boult West Middlesex Archaeological Field Group Harvey Sheldon Consultant Archaeologist, London Borough Of Hillingdon 1. APPOINTMENT OF CHAIRMAN Councillor Graham Horn was appointed as Chairman for the forthcoming year. 2. MINUTES The minutes of the meeting held on 3rd February and 31st March were agreed as correct records. 3. MATTERS ARISING Conservation Area Reviews - Jon Finney informed the meeting that the next step in the process would be consultation on the review. This was agreed. It was noted that the Ruislip,Northwood and Eastcote Conservation Area reviews had been reported to the May meeting of the Ruislip/Northwood Planning Sub- Committee. The next review to be reported will be the Harefield Village to the July meeting. 4. NOTIFICATION OF ANY OTHER BUSINESS ITEMS Two items were notified. Further information about these is included in minutes and below. 5. MUSEUM PIECES Hillingdon Conservation Council minutes 16th June 1998 Page 1 Jon Finney introduced this item, which would form the theme for meetings to be held in the coming year. A series of slides showed the settlement patterns in the West Middlesex area and a number of ancient monuments. There are 5 ancient monuments in Hillingdon Borough as follows:- · Motte & Bailey at Ruislip · Pynchester Moat · Brackenbury Moat · Ickenham Manor Moat · Harmondsworth Great Barn, which was also Listed Grade 1.
    [Show full text]
  • LAMAS Newsletter, 84 Lock Chase, Blackheath, London SE3 9HA
    CONTENTS Page Notices 2 Reviews and Articles 4 Books and Publications 16 Affiliated Society Meetings 18 NOTICES Newsletter: Copy Date The copy deadline for the May 2017 Newsletter is 20 March 2017. Please send items for inclusion by email preferably (as MS Word attachments) to: [email protected], or by surface mail to me, Richard Gilpin, Honorary Editor, LAMAS Newsletter, 84 Lock Chase, Blackheath, London SE3 9HA. It would be greatly appreciated if contributors could please ensure that any item sent by mail carries postage that is appropriate for the weight and size of the item. **************** LAMAS 161st Annual General Meeting and Presidential Address Tuesday 14 February 2017 Notice is hereby given of the LAMAS 161st Annual General Meeting and Presidential Address to be held on Tuesday 14 February at 6.15pm in the Clore Learning Centre at the Museum of London, London Wall. Light refreshments will be available from 5.30pm. The AGM will be followed by the Presidential Address by John Clark, entitled New Troy to Lud’s Town: Geoffrey of Monmouth’s London revisited. Minutes of the 160th AGM, held on 9 February 2016, will be available. The 161st AGM Agenda is as follows: 1. Apologies for absence 2. Minutes of the 160th AGM, 2016 3. Annual Report and Accounts 4. Election of Officers and Members of Council 5. Appointment of Examiner(s) 6. Election of President 7. Any Other Business Council would welcome nominations of anyone interested in becoming a member of Council. These should be addressed to the Chair at the address given on the back page of the Newsletter, or by email to the Secretary ([email protected]) to arrive no later than Tuesday 17 January 2017.
    [Show full text]
  • 12372 2M Heathrow Response Conference Report.Indd 1 07/10/2015 11:33 CONTENTS
    Assessing the work of the Airports Commission A report by Hillingdon, Richmond, Wandsworth, and Windsor and Maidenhead councils, members of the 2M Group October 2015 12372 2M Heathrow response conference report.indd 1 07/10/2015 11:33 CONTENTS Foreword . 3 1 . Strategic fit . 5 2 . Economy . 7 3 . Surface access . 9 4 . Environment . 11 5 . People . 18 6 . Costs, delivery and operational viability . 20 12372 2M Heathrow response conference report.indd 2 07/10/2015 11:33 FOREWORD This document sets out why we, as members of the 2M Group of councils opposed to Heathrow expansion, believe that the Airports Commission’s findings are not convincing. We wish to make it absolutely clear from the start that we strongly oppose the proposed building of a third runway on environmental, health, and community impact grounds. We believe the UK Airports Commission has presented MPs with an inflated and distorted case for expanding Heathrow. Throughout this report we point to a series of omissions, errors and perverse lines of argument in the Commission’s work, all of which serve to promote the third runway scheme over and above rival options for expanding the UK’s aviation capacity. As we will explain, the Commission’s methodology for comparing new runway options was engineered to favour Heathrow. Critical factors which present the greatest challenge to the third runway – such as air quality and flightpaths – have been misinterpreted or simply avoided. We examine the Final Report’s economic claims, in particular the colossal economic windfall the Commission expects to generate from a handful of new trade routes.
    [Show full text]
  • Planes, Pollution, Planning and Politics a Self Guided Walk Near Heathrow Airport
    Planes, pollution, planning and politics A self guided walk near Heathrow Airport Explore life in the shadow of one of the world’s busiest airports See and hear the impact of air and road traffic Discover historic villages and regenerated green spaces Find out the cases for and against airport expansion .discoveringbritain www .org ies of our land the stor scapes throug discovered h walks 2 Contents Introduction 4 Route overview 5 Practical information 6 Detailed route maps 8 Commentary 11 Further information 33 Credits 34 © The Royal Geographical Society with the Institute of British Geographers, London, 2013 Discovering Britain is a project of the Royal Geographical Society (with IBG) The digital and print maps used for Discovering Britain are licensed to the RGS-IBG from Ordnance Survey Cover image: Aircraft warning sign © RGS-IBG Discovering Britain 3 Planes, pollution, planning and politics Explore life in the shadow of a busy international airport Going for a walk close to one of the world’s busiest international airports might seem a strange choice. Yet right on the edge of London Heathrow is a surprising landscape of natural scenery and historic villages. Find out why this site was originally chosen for the airport and how politicians have struggled ever since to manage its growth. Stand on the centre line of a proposed new runway and hear arguments for and against airport A plane landing at Heathrow runway 27L expansion. © RGS-IBG Discovering Britain Experience for yourself the noise of aircraft and motorways and learn how they affect the air you breathe. On the other hand, discover how planning regulations have helped to protect buildings and preserve a green haven for birds and wildflowers.
    [Show full text]