Representation by Lynsey Fox
- Date submitted
- 6 October 2018
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
As a homeowner in Ramsgate, I object to RSP's proposal to open a 24/7 cargo hub at Manston. I was drawn to purchase my home in Ramsgate due to its fine beaches, clean air and quality of light, which outweigh the more challenging aspects of the sadly neglected town centre. My home is now potentially at risk from the noise pollution, damage and loss of value which a large-scale freight hub seeking an unlimited capacity for flights at night will cause, which RSP openly admit. Ramsgate has one of the largest conservation areas of houses in the country which are difficult to insulate and susceptible to vibration. Due to my home being Grade II listed, and being directly under the flight path, this worries me immensely as I would be unable to fit double or triple glazing. This would lead to loss of sleep and wellbeing as well as loss of value on the property. I am also concerned about my insurance premiums which will go up or in the worst case – I won’t be able to get building insurance at all. When purchasing the house, I knew it was near a small, disused, bankrupt air field, but there was no suggestion (at least in the public domain) that there were plans to reopen it. Ramsgate residents are extremely lucky to have beautiful beaches, the only Royal Harbour in the UK, stunning walks and the incredible Pegwell Bay Nature Reserve, which all bring in much needed tourism and spending to the area. The opening of a 24/4 cargo cub will without doubt put off tourists visiting as the cargo planes will ruin the enjoyment of the mentioned attractions. Tourism creates a lot of jobs in the area: restaurants, bars, boat trips etc, a majority of which will be lost with the harm to tourism. The loss of these jobs will be significantly more than the minimal amount created if the airport opens as a cargo hub. I also believe that RSP are in no way viable company as they not only have zero experience of running a freight hub of the scale proposed, but they have also failed to declare the source of their finances. It is also makes no sense to grant a DCO to a company based offshore with no track record, to the detriment of a British company with a good track record in redevelopment. One of the directors is [Redacted] who raises concerns locally. He is well known in the area as having been involved with previous failed attempts to regenerate this and other airports. I am concerned about the lack of proper consideration in the proposal regarding impact on traffic and road network. RSP have shown little concern regarding the overall impact of the heavy goods and vehicles along the Thanet way, the single road access. RSP show no plans for a fuel pipeline servicing the freight hub which means the HGVs will have to be transported down the Thanet way and stored somewhere. Much of this route is just dual carriageway and already heavily used. There is currently a worrying housing crisis in this country. The current land owners SHP’s proposal to build much needed housing (and supporting infrastructure) would significantly reduce the need to build on local greenbelt land. And their proposal to keep the runway for heritage fight use and as a place of interest would also boost much needed tourism to the area.