Appendix 1

Summary of key points to be considered for inclusion in our Relevant Representation response:

Topic Area

Key issues for consideration

Surface transport


·                Need to address the approaching traffic from the surrounding road network, including routes in East Sussex such as the A22 and A264, which feed into the A23/M23 corridor. Consideration of the impacts of airport growth on ESCC’s highway network beyond the immediate environment of the airport.


Public Transport

Bus/Coach service between Gatwick and Uckfield

·                The proposed new coach route to/from the airport to Uckfield would only have a 2 hourly frequency off-peak, though hourly peak time. We strongly advocate for an hourly service at all operational times.

·                Unclear as to why the Uckfield route is categorised as a ‘coach’ route. This should be provided as a bus service, permitting local travel between bus stops. 

·                Consideration should be given to extending the proposed Uckfield – Gatwick service to Heathfield. It is important to integrate this with the existing ESCC funded bus service between Heathfield and Uckfield (which ESCC proposes to increase from 2 hourly to hourly). 

·                There needs to be an integrated approach to public transport provision as there is an ESCC funded local bus service running parallel to the proposed coach route for the greater part of the route, between Uckfield and East Grinstead (this is currently the 2 hourly Monday to Friday daytime only route 261).

·                Recommend extending the 261 route beyond East Grinstead so as to provide a direct service between Uckfield and Gatwick Airport. We wish to see the operational hours of the service extended to include early mornings, evenings and weekends. This would need a funding


Crowbrough – Gatwick service

·                Scope for a Gatwick – Crowborough service. Suggest a separate ‘new’ route due to its geographical location and the limitations of the road network. There would be scope for a Crowborough – Gatwick route to run via Forest Row and East Grinstead thereby, in combination with an Uckfield – Forest Row – East Grinstead – Gatwick service, doubling the frequency between Forest Row and Gatwick.

Demand Responsive Transport

·                Any new services with Demand Responsive Transport (DRT) in mind should:

o       be wholly integrated with conventional public transport (ie. integrated ticketing and service design);

o      complement existing bus services, ie. only runs at times/to places when conventional bus services are not available; and

o      Where feasible, feed into conventional services (ie first mile/last mile principles). This does require high levels of integration, service reliability, public information, waiting facilities and ticketing.

·                In the context of Gatwick, we would see DRT in East Sussex potentially feeding the proposed Uckfield/Crowborough bus/coach links using the above principles, rather than running all the way to/from the Airport.


·                Metrobus should be engaged with, as they run bus services in the Forest Row, East Grinstead, Crawley and Gatwick areas. 

·                There is a need for a process whereby GAL liaises with the rail, coach and bus operators to get a better understanding of travel behaviour and how this may look in the future. This need to be taken into consideration when GAL develops their Airport Surface Access Strategy (ASAS).


Electric Vehicle Charging

·                Ensure that EV charging in airport car parks that meets anticipated demand, and work with both third-party parking providers and local authorities (as suggested) to boost charging facilities in the area around the airport.


Transport modelling

·                There is a concern over the impacts of the NRP on additional car journeys to the airport via Ashdown Forest which is an area of European Ecological Importance, Special Area of Conservation, and a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). As a consequence, there is a need for GAL to consider these impacts in respect of air quality - nitrogen deposition part of the modelling work being undertaken.


·                There is a need to further understand the employment and skills offer arising from the Northern Runway proposal.  We would expect substantial number of jobs and apprenticeships ring-fenced for East Sussex workforce; and that the airport work with local training providers and colleges in East Sussex to ensure that training, pathways and careers opportunities are offered.

·                GAL should seek to ensure that subcontractors deliver social value in employment and skills (i.e. subcontractors also to offer recruitment offers, apprenticeships and upskilling of staff)

·                Sub-contractors should work to the CITB national skills academy for construction framework benchmarks, and the same in relation to non-construction procurement

·                The Employment Skills and Business Strategy should include specific mention of links to Careers Hubs working with schools across Surrey, West Sussex and East Sussex.

·                In non-construction, the option should include upskilling existing workforce which includes residents of East Sussex

·                There is a need to ensure that SMEs and subcontractors include social value measures in their provision that echo those of GAL’s ESBS and that work is undertaken with LA Careers Hubs to engage with schools around the careers agenda.

·                GAL should develop an Inward Investment Service and Strategy, and that the development and delivery of initiatives led by the Sussex Chamber of Commerce and other partners should develop (not just promote) international trade opportunities with destinations aligned to LGW’s route network


·                Due to the effects of overflight and noise disturbance on people’s health and wellbeing, it is very important for us to gain an accurate understanding of how many more flights would be passing over East Sussex and which locations would be the most affected.

·                There is a need for assurances as to the accuracy and reliability of the estimated overflight mapping, and we wish to ensure East Sussex is included as part of this.

·                Air noise relates to noise from aircraft in the air, or departing or arriving on a runway, generally assessed to a height up to 7,000 feet above ground level. It is understood that some aircraft (Gatwick related air traffic) do pass over parts of East Sussex below 7,000 feet and therefore request such areas are part of the air noise modelling work.

·                The Terms of Reference for the noise envelope review should be clearly defined and include a requirement for engagement and consultation with key stakeholders as part of the review process.

Note: AECOM consultants have been commissioned to specifically consider the impacts of noise on local communities in East Sussex.

Climate change

·                There is a question of whether Gatwick expansion is compatible with the Government’s legal commitments on climate change – the Government’s own advisory body (the Climate Change Committee) has expressed caution.

·                It is important to understand the level of greenhouse gases arising from additional operations (relating to aircraft movements and ancillary operations) and how these would be mitigated. The same applies to Climate Change mitigation, and In-Combination Climate Change Impacts.

·                The negative impacts of emissions and climate change arising from aircraft flights and the ancillary operations and traffic movements associated with air travel (at Gatwick) needs careful consideration. We need reassurances that the forecasts and values used by GAL in the preliminary economic impact assessment have been assessed appropriately.

Air quality and carbon

·                GAL need to work with key stakeholders on the Carbon Action Plan to consider ways to reduce carbon emissions that are in and outside of their control, such as those arising from aircraft at take-off, and from vehicles undertaking surface access trip to/from the airport.

·                GAL need to keep stakeholder informed on the development of the process to address reducing emissions from construction, surface access and aviation

Note: AECOM consultants have been commissioned to consider the air quality and carbon impacts of the NRP and what impact(s) these would be for East Sussex.  This information is not currently available. Specific advice on the air quality impacts on Ashdown Forest has also been requested (link to surface transport).


·                Noise and vibration impacts on health and well-being of local communities needs further consideration and appropriate mitigation measures need to be identified. There is a need to consider vulnerable groups within this, that may be more affected by the impacts of noise (and vibrations).