Representation by Christine Davidson
- Date submitted
- 27 October 2023
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
In our village of Coldharbour we have had a foretaste of the impact a second runway would have on the village and the surrounding area as the flight paths were altered a few years ago without the consultation of those affected most. This will only be exacerbated by the creation of a second runway. Gatwick is a 24 hour operation at the moment. Does this mean the quota for the evening flights will increase? Presumably yes as the whole point of the second runway is to provide extra capacity. How can this be fair on the people who have chosen to live a quiet life and now find the goalposts unilaterally moved? It is argued that a second runway at Gatwick would only affect a few rural communities. The village of Coldharbour and indeed many villages surrounding the Gatwick area are designated AONBs. The area is enjoyed not only by the residents but also by many thousands of cyclists, ramblers, horse riders and the like who can escape the noise of London and appreciate the peace and tranquillity of this beautiful area. This is not an urban area and the fact that it is peaceful only highlights the noise levels already experienced. A second runway would remove overnight great swathes of woodland, footpaths and bridleways where these activities can be enjoyed. A simple pleasure like walking a dog in the woods would be taken away as would listening to birdsong. Surely any area designated as an area of outstanding natural beauty should remain as such both visually and audibly, otherwise what is the point? The south east is already choc-a-bloc with traffic. How on earth will the developers find the space which is already fit to burst to provide the infrastructure to support the extra traffic which will inevitably ensue? The train system in this country is already on its knees so this cannot be offered as an alternative to car use.