Representation by Graham Mills
- Date submitted
- 18 September 2018
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
Firstly let me preface my letter with the fact that being a local self employed business man I am certainly not against growth, development and regeneration in the area, however I would like to tell you a story about my son who was born [Redacted] ago.
My son, was born with a [Redacted]and spent the first few months of his life in Great Ormond Street Hospital, still regularly attending for medical interventions, likely to continue into adulthood. Consequently it is for my son and his continual health and well being, living directly under the flight path of Manston that I must object to the current proposals in place.
Having a [Redacted] means that my son has ongoing health issues relating to his [Redacted] and I am therefore concerned firstly about the potential particle pollution in relation to both PM10 and PM2.5, with the later being unmonitored by the local council, meaning there are no measures in place to specifically address these particles which could therefore have an impact on my sons condition.
But more pertinently, my concerns and objections surrounding the health implications for my son are imbedded within the "scientific uncertainty about the health effects of NO2". Despite these uncertainties, I am certain that with its classification as a human carcinogen, linked to lung cancer and asthma, along with the potential of the damage it causes being life-limiting, I am sure you can understand, I cannot sit idly by and allow my sons developing lungs to be damaged and his life to be limited for a third parties financial gain.
If these health matters alone are not enough to provoke thought when considering the proposals, I can accompany these concerns with the location of my home, being under the direct flightpath and the potential ill effects and safety concerns that night flights and a hundred percent increase in air traffic will cause my son and his development, my family, our neighbours and the Ramsgate community as a whole. Added to this the level and extent of both visual and aural disturbance will be unprecedented and for my son completely alien and thus once again potentially detrimental to his health, wellbeing and development.
When discussing my son's development, I must also point out that should the current proposal come to fruition, his development and education will be further impeded as he will be attending one of the two schools which are less than 3km from the runway. Therefore, if you were to consider the heights that the aircrafts will be above these schools, 150m and 185m respectively and noise levels, which when previously monitored reached levels above 90dB, I would ask how will he be able to hear what is being taught and as such receive the education he deserves?
Finally and unfortunately in contrast to my opening paragraph in which I support business growth for the local area, it is my honest belief, having been a Ramsgate resident for my entire life, thus having experienced the many different configurations, usage and ownership of Manston airport , I do not feel that the current proposal will increase business in the area or the chance of increased local employment. Conversely and has been evidenced in previous incarnations of the airport, I believe that the current proposal will not only negatively effect Ramsgate as a place to live, work and visit and therefore adversely impact on the areas much needed regeneration, but also negatively effect my son and his future health, well being and education and for that reason I must ask you to recognise my objection to the current proposal in the strongest term possible.