Representation by Michael Charles Rosario
- Date submitted
- 19 November 2023
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
I oppose Gatwick’s application for a northern runway and ask whether two Airports the size of Heathrow are really needed so close together. This would be over-saturation of a fairly small part of England. Living where I do in the Redhill/Reigate area we are already sandwiched between Gatwick’s main departure flight paths (Routes 3 & 4) and some historic Heathrow departure flight paths. A further runway at Gatwick would make noise/pollution levels for the people living in these towns/surrounding communities unbearable. The CAA has said there should be a “fair and equitable distribution of aircraft noise” in towns/communities but this is not the case here and to add even more flights would be completely unacceptable. The Government is committed to reducing its carbon output considerably, but these plans would just increase air pollution in our area. Gatwick sits on a single main road (M23) which is deemed an unsafe smart road. The huge increase in freight, passenger and work traffic would cause a major increase in congestion on the M23. Also the A roads and local roads; these roads are already unsuitable for the current volume of Gatwick traffic. Likewise, the Brighton Main Line Railway is a single track and can’t be expanded. The 4 London Airports already handle approximately 70% of UK air traffic. Increasing that percentage is surely unnecessary and completely contrary to levelling up. Gatwick is in a flood risk area and to add so much extra concrete to its site will just make the problem worse. This is a high employment area so all the additional workers required would have to be brought into this overcrowded area needing more housing, schools etc. Our local hospital/GP surgeries are already having trouble coping with the numbers they are treating so where will extra facilities be provided to service all the newcomers? The only people to benefit from Gatwick’s money-making expansion will be its shareholders; certainly not the people having to live with more pollution, frequently jammed roads in our towns and an overcrowded train service.