Representation by Tonbridge and Malling Green Party (Tonbridge and Malling Green Party)
- Date submitted
- 18 October 2023
- Submitted by
- Non-statutory organisations
Tonbridge and Malling Green Party oppose this Gatwick Airport application for a northern runway because it is in fact a new runway being brought in by the backdoor– · The policy has been misinterpreted by the applicant as this is an application for a new runway which does not comply with the Government’s Aviation Strategy. Gatwick does not have 2 runways that it can operate concurrently today, as such this is in fact a new runway which is potentially being constructed. · The proposal will result in a significant increase in aircraft noise, due to an additional 101,000 flights bringing the total number a year to a cap of 386,000. · There is a lack of affordable housing available locally to enable workers to live close enough to walk or cycle to work as the applicant proposes. There are already a lack of amenities for the community without compounding the issue. · Low skilled jobs are offered with little job security due to the volatile nature of the airport’s leisure business. · Gatwick sits on a single main road, the M23, which we consider is an unsafe smart motorway. This road does not have the capacity to deal with the current traffic levels. That is without considering 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 cannot be expanded. Gatwick seeks to add an unacceptable burden to the line with over 32m extra passengers. There is no direct rail link to Kent to alleviate the pressure on the road network serving Kent and Sussex which will be required to facilitate the increase in traffic. · We face a climate emergency, we cannot continue with airport expansion through the back door and this business as usual approach ignores the huge impact that more aviation travel has on our fragile environment*. Any new runway would add a significant amount of carbon and greenhouse gases. *Evidence CCC (2020) The Sixth Carbon Budget – Methodology Report. Available at: www.theccc.org.uk Transport We would emphasise the importance of providing sustainable access to the airport for staff and customers alike this has to concentrate on mass transport alternatives to using the private car We are disappointed that opportunities to increase the sustainable transport mode share are not being prioritised. The proposed expansion will simply increase the numbers of taxis and minicabs serving the airport given the number of firms specialising in airport shuttles, particularly in West Kent. We note the Bus and Coach Strategy will be economically sustainable. Previous such coach services have failed, market research should be undertaken to demonstrate how they can be a long-term viable solution. Gatwick expansion is not acceptable for many reasons and a key one is the absence of services to serve Canterbury West to Gatwick Airport via Ashford International, Tonbridge and the Medway Valley Line and Redhill rail service. This should be supported by providing airport passenger data showing journeys from locations on that line of route. Carbon Our key concern related to the carbon impact of the airport expansion. Gatwick’s is unwilling to ban the most polluting aircraft as has been done for the noisiest aircraft. Jet Zero is a framework to net zero for the aviation industry but many of the measures it relies on are unproven or underdeveloped technologies, for example increased Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF) production would have to compete with other demands for agricultural products which given our need to achieve food self-sustainability is unachievable. It should be also noted that the consultation on the main strategy and the supporting evidence stated that the scenarios are no more than illustrative so not necessary the defined route to net zero. With a legal duty to act on carbon emissions, the government may be forced to act beyond the scope of Jet Zero to reduce emissions, which could be through limiting capacity at airports which is irreconcilable with this project. Gatwick should not rely on the proposals in Jet Zero to meet carbon reduction targets and should go beyond the scope of these measures to both achieve net zero and mitigate the potential consequences for the industry if net zero is not reached. Noise Expansion of Gatwick will significantly increase aircraft noise for those living immediately near the airport and in the parts of Kent closest to airport and under the flight paths. The current noise envelope is not realistic and requires revision. Night Flights We believe Gatwick should introduce a ban on night flights as a condition of any further planning consent and bring in a comprehensive package of measures to incentivise the use of quieter aircraft. We note that the consultation recognises the establishment of the Noise Envelope Group. Our comments from the Autumn 2021 consultation remain unresolved and should be addressed through the Noise Envelope Group. Housing and Infrastructure Impacts We welcome the refresh of the socio-economic studies and hope that they will provide a breakdown of the economic impacts on the surrounding counties. This will improve the understanding of the economic benefits of the airport on Kent specifically. We also support the more detailed analysis of construction employment given the multiple Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects in the South East in the same timescales as this proposal.