Representation by Cllr Lin Fairbrass
- Date submitted
- 4 October 2018
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
As Cabinet member for Planning and Community Services at the time of the second statutory consultation on the proposed project, I am appalled that the response from Thanet District Council has been ignored by RSP in favour of an email from the then Leader of the opposition party -[Redacted], which RSP claims instructed RSP to ignore the content of the submission dated 16/02/18. Under Section 42 of the Planning Act 2008 the Thanet District Council submission should have been addressed. During that consultation a large majority of the residents of Nethercourt did not receive any notification of the consultation venues and were therefore unaware that it was taking place. Nethercourt, where I live, is arguably the most affected ward in the wider Ramsgate area and will suffer the most from disruption and pollution from the scale of flights required for this proposal to be considered as Nationally significant.
It is my contention that:
- The applicant has consistently failed to provide financial assurances.
- The applicant has consistently failed to provide a credible business plan.
- The applicant has consistently failed to provide consistent information regarding the amount of flights that will be required during the night.
Three separate viability reports (Falcon, Avia and Davies) conclude that Manston is not viable as an airport. [Redacted] (Azimuth) based her pro aviation report on one by York Aviation, who publicly state that she has misinterpreted their work. RSP state that Ramsgate will suffer major permanent and adverse affects on the area and to peoples lives, even though their application varies sharply from the information presented at public meetings, further undermining the reliability of their public consultation. The road infrastructure is not able to cope with the projected HGV and Fuel Tanker movements for the quantity of flights projected in the application. This being a much larger number of particularly night flights than was consulted with the public.
In conclusion, the potential for significant detrimental environmental and amenity impacts to the c40,000 residents of Ramsgate is unacceptable when there are other alternative airport sites in substantially more viable areas of the country that have not been explored by RSP, and do not carry the same level of community impact as the Manston site. This application does not pass the test of Public Interest and should not be considered a Nationally Significant Project.