For those who didn’t read my previous post about the DCO consultation correspondence here is the email I sent to RiverOak a week ago.
From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: 01 June 2016 12:15
Cc: NI Enquiries
Subject: The upgrade and reopening of Manston Airport primarily as a cargo airport
To whom it may concern.
I am writing to you as I have heard that you intend to hold a consultation this month (pre statutory consultation) relating to building an airfreight cargo hub at the former Manson Airport site.
My primary concern at this point is to ensure that there will be consultations, drop in sessions and meetings held in the towns most affected.
Ramsgate – most affected by noise pollution, particularly with respect to the number of listed buildings and the conservation area, which I assume, would make sound insulation of many of the buildings difficult and expensive.
Herne Bay – on the takeoff flight path.
Margate and Broadstairs – particularly with respect to particulate air pollution and the associated reduction in life expectancy (which is already high due to the prevailing wind direction and the air flow across southern England) as both towns would be upwind of cargo plane movements.
Could you kindly confirm that you have received this email as my previous attempt to communicate with you via your website, which was over a month ago now, hasn’t yet elicited any response from you.
Best regards Michael Child.
And here is the reply from RiverOak
From: Tony Freudmann
; CC: George
Yerrall CC: Niall Lawlor
Sent: Wed, 8 Jun 2016 14:43
Subject: RE: Your email has been received.
Dear Mr Child
George Yerrall has asked me to respond to your e-mail. I can confirm that preliminary consultations will indeed be held in the population centres most directly affected by activity at the re-opened airport. Full details will be announced in the next couple of weeks.
I think the meaning is self-evident and I don’t need to expand on this.
Next the Discovery Park’s application, the documents are all here https://planning.thanet.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=documents&keyVal=O5Z2F2QE00300
What worries me at the moment are the public comments, either supporting or objecting to the plans, particularly with respect to the new council planning website and how it could be abused.
Back in the days before the internet you could only comment on a planning application by writing to the council and giving them your name and address and I am fairly certain that the name and address of the commentator is an essential part of any valid input to the planning process, I phoned the council today and the officer I spoke to thought the same, but these things need to be checked.
Another useful piece of information from the phone call is that the public comments submitted by post will appear on the comments tab and not with the rest of the planning documents.
I think the rest of the information is self explanatory in the email below.
Sent: Wed, 8 Jun 2016 11:58
Subject: new planning website
Re my phone call about comments on using the new planning website; I am writing to request the information that wasn’t immediately at hand to the officer I spoke to, at his request.
With respect to public comments, (these were not previously published in the way they are on the new planning site) meaning that the way they are handled is pertinent to using responding to applications.
1 Comments appear either to have the respondents name and address redacted to the street name, or to have no respondents name or address. Does this mean where comments have no respondents name or address that neither were supplied to the council, and if so are these valid comments?
2 Are the comments weighted to the respondents location, and if so by what method? To expand on this would UK taxpayers opinions be of more significance that those of foreign nationals and TDC council taxpayers and local residents be of the most significance?
3 Does the council have some method of ensuring that multiple comments are not made by one respondent under different aliases? For instance, without one, the applicant could make multiple comments supporting their application and so influence the planning committee.
As discussed on the phone it is my intention to comment of some live applications, using your new website, and as these have relatively short time windows during which I can comment, your prompt reply would be much appreciated.
Best regards Michael.
Finally the painting, not much progress this lunchtime, you don’t get much time during your lunch hour, when you include walking from King Street and back and of course eating your lunch.