Representation by Vivien Sallows
- Date submitted
- 14 October 2023
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
I strongly object to this proposed project. We have lived here for over 30 years and in recent years, since Gatwick trialled and then adopted new flight paths, the noise from the aircraft has radically increased: when we first moved here, we knew that we were not that far away from the airport and accepted the then minimally disruptive aircraft noise. However, nothing prepared us for the significant increase that we now experience. Flights already wake us pre 6am and continue well after midnight. Gatwick appears to have no consideration for local residents. Our sleep is disturbed and sunny afternoons in the garden often have to be abandoned due to aircraft noise. The thought of another runway and many more flights is extremely worrying. A new runway will add more than 100,000 flights a year, with the airport operating 24/7. I object strongly to Gatwick maintaining that this proposed runway is an "existing runway that currently operates in conjunction with the main runway". This is complete misinformation as the runway in question is, and always has been, the emergency runway. Fortunately, aircraft emergencies are rare, but in the same way as hard shoulders exist on motorways, the emergency runway exists to act as a safety net for any possible incident. We all know what happened when motorway hard shoulders were removed. I object strongly to Gatwick being a law unto themselves. After months of intense research and investigation, in 2015 the Davies Commission found in favour of agreeing to another runway at Heathrow. It would appear that Gatwick are sore losers, who won't accept this decision and are intent on bending the rules and information to get another runway by whatever means that they can. I strongly object to another runway at Gatwick due to Climate Change. Gatwick should be ashamed of themselves for flying in the face of what is happening to our planet. The south of the country is under intense pressure, with developers tearing up farmland, woodland and countryside. Currently, roads are unable to cope with congestion, schools, medical facilities and affordable houses are promised but reneged on and there is not enough water to go around. More planes equal more flights, which equal more cars, more pollution, more noise, more CO2 (according to the AEF it will add more than 1.5 million tonnes of extra carbon plus greenhouse gases) more environmental destruction, more traffic and more erosion of rural lanes by cars rat-running to avoid congestion, less water. Gatwick now charge a minimum rate of £5 per car to drop off or pick up passengers to and from flights, proclaiming that the reason for this is to help with Climate Change. How can they justify another runway when they know the damage that this will do to the environment?