Representation by Susan Sadler
- Date submitted
- 23 October 2023
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
Noise Expansion of Gatwick would significantly increase aircraft noise both for those living near the airport and for those further away under flight paths, in particular departure Routes 3 and 4. Gatwick’s submission with respect to noise relies very much on the introduction of quieter aircraft and larger aircraft carrying more passengers. How will this be enforced and how will the airport be penalised if it doesn't do this? Road Traffic Gatwick’s targets to increase how many people bus, train, walk and cycle are insufficient to prevent a massive increase in road traffic around the airport. Increased road traffic and congestion, traffic noise and air pollution will be a major problem throughout the area between the M25 and Gatwick where the roads are unsuitable even for the current volume of Gatwick traffic. Nothing material is proposed in the application to fundamentally change the existing poor road and rail connectivity. The effect on local infrastructure and our communities would be wholly unacceptable. Just think about how much more traffic will flow through the area as passengers come off the M25 to avoid jams on the M23. Climate change and air pollution. Expansion on the scale proposed would increase very substantially the CO2 emissions and other climate effects associated with Gatwick’s operations and flights. There are currently no proven technologies for reducing aviation emissions at scale. Expansion of Gatwick would therefore have a material impact on the UK’s ability to meet its carbon reduction targets. The pollution caused by increased road traffic would be unacceptable and a huge capacity increase of the rail networks to the airport would be required. Carbon emissions will also result from construction works which will take many years. Flood Risk Over the years the River Mole has caused flooding on many occasions, especially when Gatwick discharges water in extreme events. Climate change is making these extreme events more frequent and severe. The last flooding here was caused by Gatwick discharging and people were out of their homes for over 6 months as a result. There is no plan to address the additional surface water flowing into the River Mole. Expansion of the Airport needs to take this into account. This application deals with flood risk on the airport and immediate vicinity in great detail but does not do so for the effects downstream. Need Gatwick is competing with Heathrow, Luton and Stansted and indeed 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 our villages and countryside. The only people to benefit will be Gatwick shareholders. Gatwick’s overall case does not 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. The four London airports already handle almost 70% of UK air traffic. Increasing that percentage is unnecessary and totally contrary to levelling up. I have very little faith that consideration will be given to the objections of this expansion and if it does receive approval then significant conditions should be imposed on Gatwick. These conditions should be as follows:- Ban on night flights. Incentivising airlines to use the quietest aircraft. Payments to local councils for roads and other infrastructure costs occasioned by the airport expansion. Releasing the land outside of the current airport boundary currently held to build a second main runway. No further expansion of the airport boundary. No landings to be allowed routinely on the northern runway. Dispersal of flight paths.