Manston Airport

Enquiry received via email

Manston Airport

20 July 2017
Jan Shepherd

Enquiry

Having just completed a thorough reading of all plans put forward by RiverOak for the development of Manston Airport I have the following observations to make:
1) Unless some massive seismic meteorological change has taken place in East Kent's topography in the last three years, the suggested flight paths are wrong. The last time Manston was operating as a commercial airport I regularly could not maintain a conversation in my own home due to low-flying commercial aircraft passing over my house. This occurred several times a day when the wind was blowing in the "wrong" direction, which happened at least twice a week and on many occasions much more often. I live in Herne Bay. Goodness only knows what aircraft noise will be like for those even closer to the airport, who will be subject to this noice each and every day.
2)On those occasions that the wind was blowing in the "wrong" direction I was woken several times a night by low-flying aircraft passing over my house. This proposal suggests "no more than" 14 aircraft movements per night. If one sleeps from 11 to 7 this number is the average equivalent of being awoken every 34 minutes. That will be the case for people much closer to the airport each and every night.This is clearly unacceptable and absurd.
3)And finally, and in my opinion, most seriously - despite their proclamations RoverOak made no attempt whatsoever to properly communicate with people in my area about their proposals AND their consultation period - obviously that had the effect that they probably received very few complaints during the correct time frame.
I am an active and engaged member of my community. I knew absolutely nothing about this until a group to which I subscribe (No Night Flights) sent me an email at the beginning of July. I live under this proposed flight path - contrary to their very inaccurate map. I received no leaflet. Neither did others I know living here in Herne Bay who are concerned about this matter. As soon as I had read that notification, I went and registered my displeasure at the RoverOak website.
This must be seen as a classic case of a greedy and dishonest company using any possible loophole to get their own way. It is not acceptable. Thanet Council must not cave in to an alluring commercial temptation which bribes them into ignoring this blatant lack of regard for fair process.
If this company is producing erroneous information in their so-calle4d "information pack" and deliberately attempting to avoid informing all who may be affected of their right to be consulted, then it is quite plain that many of their "proposals" are also liable to be dishonest or misrepresented isn't it?
This is unacceptable. Please ensure due process is applied, at the very least.

Advice given

Thank you for your email.
The proposed Manston Airport project us currently in the Pre-Application stage of the Planning Act 2008 (PA2008) process. There is no mechanism through which the Planning Inspectorate can influence an Applicant’s consultation at this stage.
In accordance with the PA2008 process, you have correctly sent your comments about the statutory consultation to the local authority Thanet District Council, as well as the Applicant, RiverOak Strategic Partners. Section 55(4) states that in making its decision about whether an application is of a satisfactory standard to be examined the Planning Inspectorate must have regard to the Consultation Report and any Adequacy of Consultation Representations made by local authority consultees. Adequacy of Consultation Representations are defined by s55(5) of the PA2008 as representations about whether the applicant complied with its duties under sections 42, 47 and 48. They are requested from all relevant local authorities on receipt of an application for development consent and considered in a statutory 28 day ‘Acceptance’ period. In providing your comments to your local authority they may be considered in the Council’s preparation of its Adequacy of Consultation Representation; if an application is submitted to the Planning Inspectorate.
I have attached the following Advice Notes which I hope you will find helpful:
Advice Note 8.0 Overview of the nationally significant infrastructure planning process for members of the public
Advice Note 8.1 Responding to the developer’s pre-application consultation
Advice Note 8.2 How to register to participate in an Examination
Advice Note 8.3 Influencing how an application is Examined
Advice Note 2 The role of local authorities in the development consent process
Our full suite of Advice Notes and legislation/guidance related to NSIPs can be found at the following link:
attachment 1
If the application is submitted and subsequently accepted for examination, you will also have the opportunity to register to participate in that examination and make submissions on whether or not the form of the proposal that is described in the application is acceptable, and whether development consent should be granted. You can register for automatic email updates on the progress of this project on our webpage.
Please note that we are in the process of preparing a Frequently Asked Questions document to assist local communities in respect of Pre-application community consultation. It will be published to our website shortly.
If you have any queries regarding the PA2008 process in relation to this project please do not hesitate to contact us.


attachment 1
attachment 1