Representation by Lee Gary Martin
- Date submitted
- 18 October 2023
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
As a permanent resident of Crawley of 15 years who has investigated and discussed this proposal locally with individuals and organisations that will also be affected, I have major concerns regarding this project and its objectives. These are: 1. This is clearly an attempt to expand Gatwick airport by building a new runway rather than developing an existing runway, with all of the additional capacity expected but without the requisite associated infrastructure to support it, such as improved and additional roads and rail for estimated 32 million extra passengers. 2. The application for a new runway does not comply with the Government's aviation strategy. 3. The increase in aircraft noise from an expected additional 101,000 fiights per year. 4. Lack of amenities and affordable housing in the area for the significant additional workforce that will be required, many of whom will be for low-skilled and low paid jobs. 5. The proposal is incompatible with the the government's net zero targets and mitigation of the climate emergency, since airport expansion on this scale will contribute significant amounts of extra CO2 from its construction and burning of aviation fuel, for which there are no alternatives. Flights and road traffic will also make air pollution significantly worse. Evidence CCC (2020) The Sixth Carbon Budget – Methodology Report. Available at: www.theccc.org.uk 6. There are no measures to incentivise the use of the quietest aircraft at night outside the hours of a ban to reduce night-flight disturbances. 7. The risk of flooding when the Airport and sewage treatment plants discharge water in extreme events. Climate change is making these extreme events more frequent and severe. Any expansion of the Airport, and related developments need to account, and fully plan, for effective mitigation. 8. The economic benefits of expanding Gatwick have been overstated by the Gatwick Airport Ltd. Significant economic, social and environmental costs have been ignored and/or understated. As there has been a net reduction in business travel and holiday flights from the UK when compared to trends for UK inbound flights since 2006, the scheme’s economic case is unviable and entails unreasonable levels of risk to local, national and international wellbeing. See [REDACTED]