Representation by Lucy Raby
- Date submitted
- 25 October 2023
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
In previous consultations it was decided that one new runway in the South was needed and as a result of the enquiry, it would be at Heathrow. This proposal therefore contravenes that decision. A 2nd runway at Gatwick goes against the levelling up policy for better transport links for the North. This is driven by greed not need We live in an area that is overflown by Route 4 and route 3, flights from Heathrow, and Redhill helicopter traffic. We already suffer from aircraft noise to an extent that affects our peace and quiet especially when sitting outside in the garden, and at night and early morning, and especially in the summer. We do not want an increase in this noise. A 35% plus increase in Gatwick air traffic would bring a huge increase in noise and air pollution with increased CO2 emissions. Also the application for an extra 48,000 parking spaces shows that the airport consider road transport to be the ideal method for getting to the airport, because of its extra parking and dropping off revenue. However it would massively increase road congestion in the area which is already congested with the extra house building in the area. The A23 and and A217 from Reigate are already jammed up and there is no extra capacity on the train lines. The building of the new runway, terminals and taxiways closer to Horley will necessitate a large construction project and will contribute more noise and air pollution to the area. And even more pollution when completed and open for traffic. There is no viable alternative to jet fuel at present, so this will increase the amount of Co2 in the atmosphere and contribute to global warming, rather than reduce it, and affect the government's commitment to net zero. . There will also be more demand for water and electricity and sewage treatment. These infrastructures are already under pressure due to the new housing estates. The extra run off of water into the river Mole will cause more local flooding around us. A 2nd runway is therefore not a sustainable option