Representation by Herne Bay Labour
- Date submitted
- 19 September 2018
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
Night Flights
We request that the Planning Inspector examines RSP’s actual proposal for night flights.
• Opaque documentation, lack of transparency and contradictory statements by the applicant means that residents are confused and concerned. • RSP and guest speakers have consistently denied their proposal includes night flights. In the Herne Bay Gazette of February 2018, it was stated “The environmental impact assessment has to include night flights but that’s not part of RSP’s business plan”
• RSP does not propose a limit on Air Traffic Movements during the night despite it’s ‘worse case’ assumption of 8 flights per night (2,920 per annum). This was quoted at the consultation event in Herne Bay in January 2108. • However, the majority of UK cargo-specific flights are night flights, and air cargo operations rely heavily on this, therefore RSP’s 17,100 cargo flights would suggest the figure of 2,920 would more likely be over 8,500 p.a. night flights. • RSP’s only means of managing night flights is the identification of an overall noise quota of 3028 QC (Quota Count) points per annum. • The number and noise of night flights actually requested and required appear to be far in excess of anything acceptable or tolerable in terms of health, wellbeing and environmental damage. • In a 2012 poll conducted regarding night flights at Manston 181 Herne Bay residents responded, with 150 (83%) citing noise and interruption of sleep as their reason for being against this proposal.
We request the Planning Inspector to examine RSP’s application with regrd to the impact on the local road network of the proposed scale of operation.
• 17,100 air traffic movements (ATM) would require the delivery by road of at least 600,000 litres of fuel daily. Any increase in ATM would result in additional fuel tankers. • The proposal forecasts from 9,903 HGV movements in year 2 to 64,906 annual HGV movements by year 20 resulting in Manston handling more freight than East Midlands Airport. • There is little evidence in the proposal of detailed consideration for additional road capacity beyond the immediate surrounds of the airport. • The only fast route access to Herne Bay and Thanet – M2 and A299 – are both just 2-lane roads and already busy with HGV traffic. • As a result of Brexit, it has been frequently highlighted by the Government that there is a significant risk of major disruption to traffic in East Kent, particularly around Dover. This could impact on the A256 (one of only 3 main access routes to/from Thanet) leaving the A299 as the only major access road to the airport, resulting in a significant increase in HGV traffic. • Such increased HGV activity would suggest significant environmental issues and a potential for major incidents. • Increased HGV traffic is likely to cause increased damage to the infrastructure increasing the cost of road maintenance by the local authority (KCC). • We do not consider that their application fairly assess the scale, significance and detrimental impact on of their proposal on local traffic and road networks.
I REQUEST MY NAME IS REDACTED FROM THE DOCUMENT AS THIS IS A GROUP REPRESENTATION