Representation by Graham Richard Pooley
- Date submitted
- 11 September 2023
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
I oppose the use of the emergency runway for other than an emergency due to the increase in aircraft noise, impact on climate change, impact on general wellbeing through increase in aircraft movements, lack of surface transport, decline in air quality, lack of necessary infrastructure, and there is no existing northern runway currently operating as a 2nd runway in conjunction with the main runway as such Gatwick is misleading residents to the existence of a 2nd runway currently. I oppose this Gatwick Airport application for a northern runway for the following reasons: It is a new runway – and not as portrayed by the Gatwick authorities Policy has been misinterpreted by Gatwick authorities This is an applicant for a new runway which does not comply with policy, Government’s Aviation Strategy. Gatwick does not have 2 runways that it can operate concurrently today as such it is a new runway being constructed. Increase in aircraft noise – evidence an additional 101,000 flights a year to a cap of 386,000. Lack of affordable housing locally to enable workers to walk or cycle to work as the applicant proposes. Lack of amenities and infrastructure Low skilled jobs are offered with little job security due to the volatile nature of the airport’s leisure business. Gatwick airport sits on a single main road, the M23 which is already deemed an unsafe smart road. To add to the huge increase in freight, passengers and workers will cause a significant increase in congestion on residential roads and an inevitable decline in air quality. The airport sits on the Brighton Main Line, which can’t be expanded. Gatwick seeks to add an unacceptable burden to the line with over 32m extra passengers. We face a climate emergency, and a new runway would add a significant amount of carbon and greenhouse gases – Evidence CCC (2020) The Sixth Carbon Budget – Methodology Report.