Representation by Jeffrey Levy
- Date submitted
- 6 October 2018
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
My family have lived in Ramsgate since 2008 and when Manston Airport was operational, were woken up numerous times by noisy unscheduled aircraft flying 200m over our house that is 3km away from the runway. This is 1 km closer than RSP state. The flights after 1am were measured by local residents at 90 to 100db. RSP have stated in their submission that they require night flights to fulfil the requirements to make their application an NSIP although they have tried to obscure this in their public statements. Members of our family are light sleepers and our teenage children are prone to episodes of [Redacted]. They are both GCSE and Further Education students and travel early to their respective schools and college from Ramsgate on weekdays. I am concerned that repeated waking when night flights are taking place, will have a detrimental effect on their education, mental health and physical health. Numerous studies such as Munich Airport in 1992 have conclusively found detrimental effects of night flight noise on educational achievement, cognitive impairment and long-term memory on young people.
RSP have admitted (12.9.68 PEIR) that there will be significant adverse effects on quality of life of surrounding communities, but have not informed our household of any of this or informed us of any consultation events. We note they have overstated considerably the sound levels (63db over 16 hours, or 55db over 8 hours in a bedroom) before sound insulation is offered, compared to government definition of intrusive noise as 51db during the day and 45db at night. They have also understated costs of sound insulation by not taking into account the true area and number of residential properties affected.
I am also concerned about the safety of the airport with Manston having a history of using carriers with poor safety records and the detrimental effect it would have on the local environment, coastline, bird sanctuaries and tourism.
RSP is an unproven company, without satisfactory evidence of financial backing, which has been rejected as a CPO partner previously by 2 council administrations after considering the evidence of 6 reports by aviation experts. The airport has proven economically unsustainable because of its location and decreasing demand for dedicated freight flights because most freight is carried in the belly of passenger flights.
I hope you will thoroughly investigate RSPs motives, viability and directors and ensure that they are not trying to purchase the land cheaply for land banking. If an airport is approved the council has planned to fulfil its housing obligations by building on agricultural land rather than the Manston brownfield site. We hope you will also examine the current owners plans for the site and how this will fulfil government quotas for house building, with infrastructure, business opportunities and amenities included. We believe Stone Hill Park offer a better likelihood of more local jobs and economic growth than RSP for one of the most deprived areas in the country.