Representation by Ian G. Wilson
- Date submitted
- 17 October 2023
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
I strongly object due to the following reasons: Existing or new Runway? • From: ‘Beyond the Horizon – Making Best Use of Existing Runways’ an HM Government publication “Therefore the government is supportive of airports beyond Heathrow making best use of their existing runways.” I do not consider that this project is using an existing runway. Moving the existing standby runway 12m north to meet the minimum European Aviation Safety Agency standards means that this is a new runway not an existing one. Removing a 12m wide 2600m length of runway and building a new 12m wide x 2600m length of new runway together with new taxiways, is a not an existing runway. National impacts: • The South East/London already has one of the busiest air spaces in the UK. This development, if allowed, would add even greater pressure on this overcrowded air space. • The four London airports (London Heathrow, London Gatwick, London Stansted and London Luton) already handle over two thirds 2/3 (67%) of all UK passengers from the 10 busiest UK airports by passenger number (2022). Also bearing in mind the proposed expansion at Heathrow, how does this help “levelling up” and reducing the pressure on the one of the busiest air spaces in Europe? • Any expansion at Gatwick, due to its geographical position, means that even greater pressure will be put on the M25/M23. The M25 is already saturated and is recognised as a very frequent “traffic hold up route”. The minor Highway improvements on the M23 spur/slip roads will have no effect on relieving this. • Gatwick airport has very limited rail connection with just one north/south line (Brighton to London) and no underground connection to London, unlike Heathrow which has the Elizabeth Line serving Terminals 2, 3, 4 and 5, connecting Heathrow with Central London, East London and Essex, along with Reading via changes. • Gatwick is competing with Heathrow, Luton, Stansted and other regional airports for a bigger share of the leisure passenger market. Bringing all those extra passengers to Gatwick will have a huge adverse environmental effect on local communities. Gatwick’s “needs case” does not fully comply with the Airports National Policy Statement (ANPS) which requires airports (other than Heathrow) that are seeking to expand, to demonstrate sufficient need for their proposals, additional to (or different from) the need which would be met by the provision of a Northwest Runway at Heathrow. Climate change and air pollution. • The proposed expansion would very substantially increase the carbon dioxide emissions and other climate effects associated with Gatwick’s operations and flights. There are currently no proven technologies or possible future technologies for reducing aviation emissions to compensate for the proposed increase. Expansion of Gatwick would therefore have a material impact on the UK’s ability to meet its carbon reduction targets. Carbon emissions will also result from construction works and increased road traffic to the airport. Local impacts:- • Road Traffic. The proposed development will result in Gatwick handling a similar number of passengers to Heathrow but without the road and rail connectivity of Heathrow. Already the market towns and rural villages north of Gatwick suffer traffic problems due to employees and airport passengers using non motorway roads and rural lanes to get to Gatwick. This development, if allowed, will make this situation significantly worse. More traffic, more pollution. This is unacceptable • Overflight noise pollution. Expansion of Gatwick would significantly increase aircraft noise for the population immediately north of Gatwick and south of Heathrow. Many of these residents are affected by the heavily used departure routes 3 and 4 from Gatwick and for some communities also from Heathrow’s most heavily used departure route 27L/R DET as well. The resultant increase of overflights of these communities is totally unacceptable and would increase the strain on the mental health of these residents due to the aircraft related noise and pollution. • Flood Risk. The River Mole has caused serious flooding to villages such as Betchworth and Brockham. This is excacerbated by surface water from the acres of hardstanding etc. within Gatwick airport which eventually is discharged into the River Mole. Climate change is making extreme wet weather events more frequent and severe. This application attempts to deal with flood risk on the airport and immediate vicinity but does not do so for the effects downstream. More hardstanding will result in more frequent flooding events. • The Build process. This application is much more than just bringing into use an existing runway. It involves 5 years plus of major construction work to Gatwick infrastructure and facilities: moving a an existing 2.6km runway 12m, pier and stand amendments (including a proposed new pier), new aircraft taxiways, extensions to the North Terminal and South Terminal, provision of additional hotel and office space, provision of reconfigured multi-storey car parking, including new multi-storey car parks, highway alterations, demolition and relocation of the CARE facility, provision of additional water treatment facilities and others. • Employment. Gatwick Airport claims that one of the benefits of this project is that it would create 14,000 additional jobs. This region (the South East) has one of the lowest unemployment rates in the UK. So one can only assume that most of the newly created jobs would result in employees originating from outside the area. This would create even more commuting and even greater pressure on the limited housing stock surrounding Gatwick which in turn could create the need for more house building in an already over populated region.