Representation by Rob Gussinklo
- Date submitted
- 25 October 2023
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
To whom it may concern, I would like to register my concerns over Gatwick’s proposed expansion scheme. The proposals certainly don’t lack in ambition but can that ambition be achieved in Kent, Sussex and Surrey (the areas principally affected by the proposals) without significant alteration to current living conditions? There are the local concerns regarding Noise, public transport, road congestion, pressure on local housing and parking. Then there are the implications of a wider nature. Noise: In an earlier bid for expansion Gatwick implemented a narrowing of flightpaths approaching the airport strategy. Apparently, this approach allowed more planes to arrive “safely” by having them “line up astern” at the required 2 mile intervals. In reality this meant virtually every arrival ended up making its turn over the villages to the west of Tunbridge Wells. This meant that dwellings below this flightpath having to put up with near constant aircraft noise. We as local residents mounted a campaign to restore the previous, more acceptable, plan to follow a far wider dispersal of arrival routes. Thus sharing the noise over a bigger area and making it less obtrusive to all. The question I have about the proposed expansion is, will the increased number of aircraft movements (70% I believe) be similarly dispersed over the surrounding area? I think it unlikely. We were also told that aircraft engines were getting quieter and that there would be few if any overnight arrivals. I have to tell you that we hear planes arriving almost every night when we retire to bed. This would speak to the contrary of these last two points. Public transport and road congestion: In order to deliver the increased number of passengers, some 80 million of them by some accounts, transportation will have to increase commensurately. Will this increase in passenger numbers herald the building of another rail link? HS3 perhaps? If so, how long will that take to come on stream to relieve the burden on the existing rail link that is The Gatwick Express? I believe in common parlance this rail link is only express when it’s running! Unlike Heathrow which at least can be approached via two motorways, Gatwick only has the M23. Anyone who regularly travels past junction 7 on the M25 (the M23 turn) will tell you how susceptible both motorways are to congestion. Given the difficulties experienced in delivering HS2 are we to believe that additional motorway capacity will be readily available to take up the strain? Pressure on affordable local housing: In their fantasy publication Flightpath to the Future they would have us believe that more jobs and extra prosperity will flow from this expansion scheme. I’m no expert and I don’t have a raft of pertinent statistics to back me up but I feel that employment in the South East is near full. I would therefore question the logic of a proposed scheme to create even more jobs without considering the wider implications and long term outcomes. More people need more homes, and infrastructure. Providing this will be a much bigger enterprise than is outlined in Gatwick’s proposals. As regards greater prosperity, rather contentiously I would ask if those people in the Southeast actually need more prosperity. In my estimation, the North South divide in prosperity terms is growing ever larger by the day. Could not the much vaunted “levelling up” agenda be served better by enhancing other airport capacity rather than augmenting that in the South East? Carbon Emissions: I cannot believe that the level of expansion proposed will not lead to ever greater emissions of CO2. As I understand it currently there are no overall ways to limit aviation pollution. Therefore this proposal moves us even further away from our stated target of becoming carbon neutral by 2030. Add to this, the inevitable effects of construction work and increased traffic on the ground in and around the Gatwick area. Air Pollution: Another area for the experts to look at would be that of Air pollution. I believe any expansion of this magnitude should only be given the go ahead if a report produced by independent industry experts tells us that the effects of this “invisible killer” will be negligible. Economic effects: Again, I’m no expert and I’m certainly not an economist but surely everyone can see that increasing airport capacity will not only bring tourists into the country but also inevitably, encourage tourists to take their holiday funds out of the country. One up-beat word that came out of the pandemic was “staycation”. I for one found many more interesting things to do and places to go in this country as we eased ourselves out of lock down restrictions. The tourism and hospitality industries in this country nearly collapsed altogether during lock down. Should we not be looking to encourage the staycation approach in order to maintain these industries that are so vital to our way of life? Has anyone looked at estimated costs of this expansion set against the supposed benefits? In other words has there been any independent work done on a cost/benefit analysis?