Representation by Ronald Osborn
- Date submitted
- 17 September 2018
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
I am very surprised that anyone is prepared to invest money in a project so apparently flawed as this one. There have been numerous studies of airport capacity in the south-east in recent times. None seem to have uncovered a need for an additional cargo hub. At Manston we hardly need a study. We have proof over many years that air freight operators are not attracted to Manston sufficiently to make it viable. If anything the need for dedicated cargo flights seems to have declined since Manston airport was last operational.
I have two concerns. One is noise and compensation – I live under the landing path. The other is the potential waste of precious land resources.
LAND RESOURCES The former Manston airport is a large area of land that has remained under-utilised since the second world war. The opportunity now exists to develop it for housing and other uses urgently needed in Thanet. My fear is that granting permission for a flight hub will result in an under-used facility that will fail to attract freight operators, make huge losses, and leave Thanet with a white elephant for future generations.
NOISE & COMPENSATION I have lived under the landing path at St Nicholas at Wade with the previous airport. We are very close to the end of the runway and planes landing from the west passed over us at low level. The noise was colossal and the windows shook. Even indoors with the double glazed windows shut the noise was quite severe. Fortunately flights were fairly infrequent. The number of flights planned with the current proposal would be of a different order. We did get a taste of how bad it would be when, for a short period, a pilot training school was in operation. Repeated landings are disruptive to everyday life and become very wearing.
The application makes provision for noise insulation for a very small number of residential properties. This seems totally inadequate. No mention is made of St Nicholas at Wade at all. It does mention significant noise levels at a later stage of airport development at a place called Wade. I have never heard of a place called Wade but if it does mean St Nicholas at Wade then I would have to ask why only significant at a later stage of development. Noise levels would be significant at every stage of development. Frequency would be the difference. The compensation levels proposed for serious noise disturbance and the number of properties identified both seem ridiculously small.
Over large areas of Thanet, Herne Bay and outlying villages (not just the worst affected) noise will be serious enough for people to need to shut all windows and doors. Climate change will result in summers becoming hotter. Compensation for air conditioning in addition to noise insulation would be essential in all these areas. The compensation provisions in the proposal seem to have been vastly under-estimated.
CONCLUSION Even if successful, a freight hub would have little positive benefit for Thanet. The negative effects would be serious however: noise, safety, pollution, health, loss of seasonal birds and devastation of the tourist industry.