Breaking news: Brussels Noise regulations are not illegal

[pascal-air]

This is a news because two different courts said two different things about Brussels noise regulations: constitutional or non-constitutional. The State Council of Belgium has just decided they are not illegal.

This is an important point because the Brussels Government did not ask for the penalty, in the case the State of Council would conclude they are illegal. Now, the last barrier avoiding them for asking penalties is broken.

Another point, that is not completely part of the subject but linked with, the number of complains is increasing dramatically:

2003: 2 281
2004: 40 973
2005: 144 500
2006: 144 500 (until january), 450000 foreseen for the full year

(Belga)

Pascal

[teddybAIR]

Why do these people even complain? The airport has always been there and if you live within a radius of 15 km of a main airport, you should expect airplanes flying over your head. The fact that all movements used to be concentrated on 25R (they did: I live in Evere and a few years ago, during summer holidays, there was no silence for half a minute in peek hours) is no excuse for people living in other regions to ban all movements over their heads. Actually, they ask for a dishonest system to be continued.

- My answer when they complain about the noise:

To me, the most honest system is the one where the number of movements over a given area is a function of the number of people that live in that area: the more people, the less movements.

- Yet, the airport has a certain economic impact (positive) on everybody living in Belgium. Therefore justifying that you would have more flights over dense population areas.

Nevertheless, the outcome should be a compromise and people should stop arguing about the amount of aircraft flying over their heads!

bAIR

[Atlantis]

The reason why there is a huge increase of complains is not only made by people but the major part of it by computers.

When a computer register a plane who made a noise, f.e. more then 75db, then it send immediately an e-mail to the "ombudsdienst".

Some computers sends more then 50 to 100 mails per day!!!! That's why there is that increase.

I would say, nothing to worry about. The government, BIAC, etc knows about this.

[fokker_f27]

Why do these people even complain? The airport has always been there and if you live within a radius of 15 km of a main airport, you should expect airplanes flying over your head. The fact that all movements used to be concentrated on 25R (they did: I live in Evere and a few years ago, during summer holidays, there was no silence for half a minute in peek hours) is no excuse for people living in other regions to ban all movements over their heads. Actually, they ask for a dishonest system to be continued.

I agree. And it's mostly the people who meved to the airport because the ground is cheaper that complain. People who have always lived near the airport almost never complain.

[Zenfookpower]

This is a news because two different courts said two different things about Brussels noise regulations: constitutional or non-constitutional. The State Council of Belgium has just decided they are not illegal.

This is an important point because the Brussels Government did not ask for the penalty, in the case the State of Council would conclude they are illegal. Now, the last barrier avoiding them for asking penalties is broken.

Another point, that is not completely part of the subject but linked with, the number of complains is increasing dramatically:

2003: 2 281
2004: 40 973
2005: 144 500
2006: 144 500 (until january), 450000 foreseen for the full year

(Belga)

Pascal

1)The Brussels Government did not ask for the penalty.. I cannot understand this.. Who then DID ask for the penalty..
2) Now, the last barrier avoiding them for asking penalties is broken.
Who is them..

Does this all means that from now on, or in the near future, there will be fines because planes are too noisy..or because people and/or computers complain.. ????????????

I repeat some of my earlier "reflections" .. who is looking after the "welfare" of all those people who are employed by the airport and support activities.
Airlines are not in the business to pay fines because their planes are too noisy...?? Hence they will cease to operate from Brussels..

I cannot understand this at all...

[Atlantis]

Yeah, this is Belgium, very small but also very complicated. And this is only one example.

[blackhawk]

1)The Brussels Government did not ask for the penalty.. I cannot understand this.. Who then DID ask for the penalty..

according to the VRT, the french-speaking part of Brussels, they would like to see the money. Well to be honest, if I was the group of airline companies, I would try to find out who is complaining and asking for money and ban them from flying out of Brussels.

[Zenfookpower]

1)The Brussels Government did not ask for the penalty.. I cannot understand this.. Who then DID ask for the penalty..

according to the VRT, the french-speaking part of Brussels, they would like to see the money. Well to be honest, if I was the group of airline companies, I would try to find out who is complaining and asking for money and ban them from flying out of Brussels.

There you go.. Not bad .. not bad at all....

[Sabena_690]

2006: 144 500 (until january), 450000 foreseen for the full year

*sigh*, why am I not surprised to see that it is exactly you who is using this kind of figures.

As said above, a huge number of complaints are computer generated (one complaint gets multiplied a big number of times).

Instead of wasting your time with this kind of postings, I invite you to browse through those 144 500 complaints. I'm sure that if you look at the number of different people/families who sent those complaints, that you will get a "less impressive" figure (which is an understatement).

So 450 000 complaints is the number you want to see at the end of the year? Then go ahead with complaining! Everybody has a hobby and/or passion (and complaining seems to be one of them for some people).

Frederic

[pascal-air]

I cannot understand this.. Who then DID ask for the penalty..
2) Now, the last barrier avoiding them for asking penalties is broken.

For the full story, the brussels area is recording every infractions according to their regulations, but decide to not ask for penalty since the judgement may be broken by justice. Other people who said they are waiting for negotiation results and put them into the balance. Of course, for the negotiations, it was difficult to put them into the balance since they may be revoked by the Council. From now, I do not think that they will ask for penalty, but will put them into the balance and they will ask for the 1999 situation return. Otherwise, if the mobility government does not accept, they will ask for the money, and of course the amount of money is huge...

[pascal-air]

I am agree with you, most of the complaints are automatically recorded but there are completely legal, like an automatic radar. You can not ignore them, and if you go too fast, you receive a penalty. Moreover, such device are regular controlled by legal entities and were put in place by government. Anyway, I think that it is not bad for the airport and now there will be a return to the 1999 situation (they will probably forced), and things will be like in 1999. It will be better for the airport

[Zenfookpower]

I cannot understand this.. Who then DID ask for the penalty..
2) Now, the last barrier avoiding them for asking penalties is broken.

For the full story, the brussels area is recording every infractions according to their regulations, but decide to not ask for penalty since the judgement may be broken by justice. Other people who said they are waiting for negotiation results and put them into the balance. Of course, for the negotiations, it was difficult to put them into the balance since they may be revoked by the Council. From now, I do not think that they will ask for penalty, but will put them into the balance and they will ask for the 1999 situation return. Otherwise, if the mobility government does not accept, they will ask for the money, and of course the amount of money is huge...

Now I am completely confused.. I cannot even understand what you are trying to say (write).. Is there a newspaper or other media source you can reference to.. please put in a link to it ..
If the real situation is like you tried to explain then I believe this will never be resolved

Thanks..

[Atlantis]

Better for the airport????? Better for Brussels you mean!!!!

The idea of Blackhawk is not that bad, but we - some people who are involved very close to the airport - have said the same more then a year.
All those people of Brussels who have complaints about the airport have to go on a black list and that list has to be used by all the airlines on our airport. When there is someone of Brussels who wants to take the airplane, sorry buddy, on way ticket to the exit!!!!

It's very simple, they want to close the airport and build it up in the bushes of the Ardennes.

Isn't it very curious? They predict 7000 extra jobs for the two local airports in Walloon. I know why. But I can say that if the airport has to close, this will be the end for Belgium. Poor people.

[Bottie]

Isn't it very curious? They predict 7000 extra jobs for the two local airports in Walloon. I know why. But I can say that if the airport has to close, this will be the end for Belgium. Poor people.

That's what I said months ago ... I'm curious how this would be handled when the airport was placed on the south-side of the languagebarrier ... Poor Belgium

[Zenfookpower]

I am aware that there is a "problem" in Belgium between the "Flemish" and the "Walloons" but I never could believe that such a "pity" issue is dividing your country ...We also have airports over here, some of which are very close to populated area's ..Take Chicago-Midway for instance..well I don't hear that kind of rhetoric.. Anyway..I also understand that prior to the EU formation each country had its own pride of having an "International" airport.. and on the other hand this has been changed with the EU.. and one can make an argument about having international airports that close together.. s.a Amsterdam-Brussels-Paris-
I once had a flight from AMS to BRU cancelled and had to take the train from AMS and I was amazed to experience how smooth this went...I had to be in Antwerp and guess what.. The train did stopped there.. Anyway..I am just an outsider looking in and trying to understand..But it is not easy I might add..

[Bottie]

I am aware that there is a "problem" in Belgium between the "Flemish" and the "Walloons" but I never could believe that such a "pity" issue is dividing your country ...

It's indeed unbelievable that the jobs of thousands of people is in danger because there are some who think their 'life' is more important, the so called 'as long as I sleep well I don't care'-mentality.

[gumblebee]

If I recall correctly, two types of penalties apply in case the Brussels noise regulations are breached :

• 1. Against the airlines whose planes make too much noise
  2. Against the federal government, in case traffic control fails to make airplanes respect the noise regulations

The Brussels government has imposed penalties of the 1st type. Until now airlines have refused to pay, pending demands before the administrative High Court (Raad van State/Conseil d'Etat) to annul the noise regulations. These demands were refused today. The accumulated penalties might be fairly important.

A verdict in favor of the Brussels government introduced a 2nd type of penalty. This verdict was pronounced in June 2005 by the Court of Appeals in Brussels. In October 2005, the federal government requested the Cour de Cassation to annul these penalties. This procedure is still pending, but todays verdict has weakened the case for the federal government.
For political reasons, the Brussels government has not imposed any penalties of this 2nd type yet.

Another contradicting penalty was introduced in March 2006 by other judges of the same Court of Appeals in Brussels. They instructed the federal government to spread noise around the airport as equally as possible and that the Brussels' noise regulations should be ignored (they did not have the authority to annul the noise regulations). A similar verdict of june 2003 was annulled by the Cour de Cassation in march 2004.

There may be a little bit more clarity now (Brussels noise regulations are validated). Maybe now the balance of powers are clearer, political discussions can start in earnest.

[JulietHotel]

At this point there is only one solution, and it's a compromise: go back to the situation as it was before the concentration on the Noordrand and then the so-called 'spreidingsplan' - 'plan de dispersion'.

At that time only a few extremists were complaining about the airport, despite more movements than nowadays (Sabena was still flying...).

As far as I know, NOBODY would accept that the E40 motorway is suddenly diverted into the quiet street in front of their house... Why should it be different with airplanes?

Sorry but the rest is politics or people talking about things they do not know.

[Old Nickname - VG]

I Say Bomb Those Complainers because there building more houses and so more complains each year

i hope there come's finnaly soem good people to buy houses in other states

[icr5]

I would buy a house in Kortenberg or Steenokkerzeel. Perfect place for spotting and it is 10 mins drive to my office .