Back to list Manston Airport

Representation by Albion Place Heritage (Albion Place Heritage)

Date submitted
1 October 2018
Submitted by
Members of the public/businesses

Our group is firmly against night flights of any description. We mainly represent owners of residential buildings which are predominantly Georgian / Regency grade 2 and are prevalent in the local area. the buildings lie directly under the flight path at a distance of approximately 2.5 miles from the runway. We object for the following reasons:

  1. Albion Place is the first area of land from the coast over which flights would travel and is directly under the flight path [I have a picture of a plane literally above one of the houses].
  2. Any noise from aircraft will be heard from many miles away, as there is no land, nor buildings to deflect or otherwise absorb noise from aircraft. This means that Albion Place and the surrounding area will arguably be most affected by the noise and for longer. I am not aware of any research that has bene undertaken to ascertain the effect of noise on this area which had been modelled to take into account its unique position.
  3. The many residential properties of Albion Place and nearby are at considerable hight above sea level, and will therefore he nearer to the planes of their approach making noise pollution greater. Living accommodation in some properties is approximately 23m above sea level.
  4. The properties along the sea front directly under the flight path [and many more inland] form part of one of only 10 Historic England Heritage Action Zones in the UK- designated for its rich architectural heritage and potential. This will be blighted by an airport with night flights as no-one will want to live in buildings in which appropriate mitigation cannot be made. This will jeopardise the unique historic environment.
  5. During the summer months, it is normal practice for residents to open their windows on the upper floors at the beginning of summer, and close them in the Autumn. This allows for adequate ventilation and keeps the properties cool. Without the windows permanently open, it is too hot to sleep. Old properties are designed to 'breath' in this manner using sash windows. It will not be possible to keep windows open in the houses at night with aircraft flying overhead at night. Planning law will severely restrict any possible mitigation to reduce the noise by installing triple glazing, and even if this were possible, the houses will require fitting with air-conditioning units in every room. Many of these house contain 10-18 rooms, and it is difficult to imagine how this might be achieved in a manner consistent with planning regulations and historic building consent. Even if this was achieved, the running costs would be extremely high, and the constant noise from units would have a detrimental affect on health and wellbeing and sleep.
  6. The levels of pollution in Albion Place are likely to be amongst the highest on the flight corridor and detrimental to health. Ultrafine particles (UFPs) are emitted by aircraft engines during near-surface level operations including taxi, takeoff, climb, descent, and landing, as well as idling at gates and on taxiways. A recent study by the Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 2015 found that emissions from the landing and take off aircraft cycle, were found to have significant pollution related health impacts for communities living closest to airports, contributing to 49% of the premature deaths associated with aircraft emissions in Europe.The study concludes that "aviation related emissions of particulates and ozone contribute to poor health, and not just for those people living close to the airport. This should be considered in the health impact assessment and economic assessment of any expansion proposal."
  7. Noise pollution will also affect sleep quality which in turn is detrimental to health. in a recent study on the effect of aircraft noise on sleep disturbance among the residents near a civilian airport: a cross-sectional study, it concluded that "insomnia and daytime hypersomnia were approximately 3 times higher in the noise exposure group, as compared to the control group".
  8. In 2015 the airports commission published a report on airport noise. one of its conclusions was that "Efforts to reduce exposure should primarily reduce annoyance, improve learning environments for children, and lower the prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors and cardiovascular disease". There are approximately a dozen schools [and many nurseries] directly under the flight path in ramsgate within 2 miles of the end of the runway. Educational attainment in Thanet is already amongst the UKs lowest, and any additional factors to make learning more difficult will only increase the likelihood of poor attainment. I believe that study in Germany concluded that when an airport was moved, children's attainment under the new flight path worsened, and those under the old flight path improved. I do not wish my child's attainment to be impacted.
  9. In Kent County Council's response to the call for evidence to the Government's aviation strategy it stated "Mitigation and compensation cannot counteract the inability of residents to sleep, the reduction in educational attainment of children, or the wider negative health impacts of noise. It is simply not possible to insulate an open window or a garden. The increased overflight of designated landscapes will also disrupt the tranquillity from which many people benefit"
  10. the airport will make impact detrimentally on the peaceful enjoyment of local parks, and beaches
  11. Thanet is the fastest growing tourism destination in the UK [Visit Kent and Visa Thanet report 2017]. This is creating many new jobs and making a vital economic impact to a poor area of Kent. It is likely that the numbers of people wishing to visit an area with night flights will deteriorate substantially. This economic impact needs to be appropriately assessed and weighted in light of any proposed benefits.
  12. According to Noms data, Thanet [in which Ramsgate is the largest town] is one of the fastest growing economies in the UK. This is mainly driven by a dramatic increase in tourism and the creative sector. Both will be at risk from noisy night flights which will deter tourists and the creative sector from coming.
  13. According to official government statistics. since the airport closed in May 2015 there are 20,000 more people in employment across Thanet. In December 2017, local employment rates [80%] overtook the UK [75%] and SE England [79%] average. Since 201The economy is thriving without an airport and the airport is a risk to this economic growth.
  14. Over recent years, thousands of people have relocated from London to Thanet for the quality of life. This reduces the burden on the London housing market, and will continue to do so. I know a large number of people who are now thinking of selling their properties because they do not want to take the risk of having their quality of life changed by night flights.
  15. From June 2013 to Dec 2017, employment growth outstripped the SE and the rest of the UK growing by a staggering 21.3% compared to 3.8% and 4% respectively. Thanet does not need an airport for job growth.
  16. Representations and comments from elected politicians has deliberately or through omission over emphasised the potential of an airport and not considered the negative affects. This includes making public statements about the applicants intention to not needing night flights.
  17. The continued uncertainly over the potential of the airport will lead to investment and planning blight. The housing market has already seen a down turn since the DCO was submitted.
  18. Given the track record of the applicant on other projects, it is unclear if they wish to obtain the airport site to bring it back into operation, or simply to acquire it from the existing developers, to build houses on the site. Of course- should the DCO be accepted, placing a restriction on the DCO to prevent any further houses to be built on the site or adjacent northern grasslands would make clear their intentions. If a resection is made to the affect that no houses can be built- then it will be clear that they want it as an airport.
  19. Should the DCO be accepted then compensation in the form of purchasing properties in which appropriate mitigation cannot be made, in the affected areas at their 2018 values [plus anticipated uplift if the airport hadn't materialised], should be made a condition.