Representation by Cherisse Thorne
- Date submitted
- 12 September 2018
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
[Redacted]. I strongly object to RSPs proposal on the basis of Noise, Safety and Biodiversity.
As a resident of Southwood Gardens for the last 21 years (2.5km to runway) I am concerned that RSPs Major Accidents and Disaster Assessment and Mitigation Plan fails to address the risk factors adequately. As an area which is vastly populated by young families and at least 3 schools Chilton/Christ Church Primary / Chatham Clarendon Grammar encompassing approx 2047 children I consider the proposals to be erroneous in their consideration to this fact. When the airport was operational SEL noise readings from the top of the schools measured consistently above 90db which would have a severe impact on teaching and hearing loss. Indeed I can remember the last night flights that used to shake our house as they approached the run way. A vortex incident in Southwood Gardens caused our neighbours roof to fall off and narrowly miss her! Had this happened at Chilton school the loss of children’s life would have been significant. I also believe that a KAM Air Plane in 2010 narrowly missed causing a disaster. The Cargo aircraft were of a poor safety standard. Examples are Meridian, Kam Air all now banned from UK Air Space.
RSP states that Ramsgate is 4KM from the runway. This is erroneous. Currently the built up area begins 1.3km from the runway and directly under the flight path. It is 4KM across Ramsgate from the Marina to the runway. All the schools above are under the flight path and new residential areas are 500m from the run way.
The last night flights seriously affected our health/ sleep patterns by inflicting insomnia and its detrimental effects because of the noise/vibration the airplanes created.
RSP has submitted dubious noise measurement readings. CAA noise measurement of Boeing 787 operations at Heathrow airport where no reading at 3.8km from the end of the runway was less than 90SELdBA. We are in St Lawrence area (1.6km). How can they be lower?
Despite the applicant insistence that he neither “wants or needs night flights” later on in the Noise Mitigation Plan he proposed to accept night flights rated QC4 prohibited from London airports on noise grounds. This was not transparent at consultation.
Since the airport closed we have noticed the considerable increase in the no of birds and wildlife returning to our garden. Thanet Coast/ Pegwell Bay area is a highly important nature conservation area and is protected under law. The applicant has failed to give consideration to this fact. The report admits significant adverse effects to the increased noise in the vicinity of the airport but maintains will not have significant effects on the designated sites that border the communities! This is very questionable.
This area is in desperate need for housing and self perpetuating employment. I believe that the Stone Hill proposal would bring these much needed requirements to the area whilst preserving our heritage and environment alike.
Yours sincerely,
Cherisse Thorne.