Reigate & Banstead Council urges Airports Commission not to rule out 2nd runway at Gatwick for more detailed consideration
The Leader of Reigate and Banstead Borough Council has written to the Airports Commission, to ask the Gatwick runway scheme to be on the shortlist. Cllr Joan Spiers said in her letter to Sir Howard Davies that the airport is locally important for the local economy and local jobs. But she stopped short of declaring her outright support for a 2nd runway. Council chief executive John Jory said: “This council has not got a formal view yet on a 2nd runway and in no way are we trying to say to the Davies Commission we are giving this the green light and being supportive.” The letter to the Commission mentions “concern about adverse and consequential impacts such as noise, air pollution, additional traffic and pressure to provide more housing” from a 2nd runway and says: “… we believe that Gatwick’s proposals should be included in the Commission’s shortlisted options. This will ensure the fullest possible consideration of the benefits and impacts of a second runway and will allow the Borough Council, on behalf of our local communities, to reach an informed conclusion about the proposals based on robust and comprehensive evidence.”
.
Tweet
Reigate & Banstead Council urges Airports Commission not to rule out second runway at Gatwick
THE leader of Reigate and Banstead Borough Council has written to the man tasked with recommending how airports should grow in the South East.
Joan Spiers wrote to Sir Howard Davies, who is chairing the Airports Commission, on Friday, to outline the importance of a thriving Gatwick Airport to the local economy and local jobs.
But she stopped short of declaring her outright support for the airport’s proposed second runway.
However, the letter does refer to the “possible negative impacts of a recommendation by the commission to support growth elsewhere”, and urges Sir Howard that Gatwick’s proposals should be included in the commission’s shortlist of options.
But when the council’s executive debated the letter at a meeting last Thursday, the value of sitting on the fence was questioned.
Redhill West councillor Julian Ellacott said: “I am not convinced what it adds to the debate and believe it can be construed in any which way the reader wants to construe it.
“Gatwick Airport would construe it as a letter of support and I don’t think that is what is intended.”
Council chief executive John Jory said: “This council has not got a formal view yet on a second runway and in no way are we trying to say to the Davies Commission we are giving this the green light and being supportive. The intention is purely to make clear to the commission we think there is merit in taking this project forward for proper full evaluation and consideration.”
However, Green Party members, who are opposed to the second runway proposal, say they felt the letter did appear to “endorse” the expansion.
———-
The letter says:
“Gatwick Airport is central to the local and national economy in terms of attracting and retaining global businesses, promoting business growth and providing jobs. Many of the Borough’s residents are employed in jobs directly or indirectly related to the airport. Gatwick Airport itself is one of the major businesses in the area, and as such we believe it should be supported to thrive and be successful. It is understandable that proposals to expand the capacity of any airport, including Gatwick, give rise to concern about adverse and consequential impacts such as noise, air pollution, additional traffic and pressure to provide more housing.
Given the importance of the airport to our local economy, and the possible negative impacts of a recommendation by the Commission to support growth elsewhere, we believe that Gatwick’s proposals should be included in the Commission’s shortlisted options. This will ensure the fullest possible consideration of the benefits and impacts of a second runway and will allow the Borough Council, on behalf of our local communities, to reach an informed conclusion about the proposals based on robust and comprehensive evidence.
We also consider it important that the sponsors of shortlised proposals are required to engage closely and constructively with the local authorities whose communities will be affected by those proposals, and would ask that you ensure that this happens. We aim to work constructively with Gatwick, if their scheme is sleected to go forward so that we can fully understand the benefits and impacts of their proposals.”
.
.
.