LHR 3rd runway - news just in...

Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊



Herr Tubthumper

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jul 11, 2003
62,697
The Fatherland
From the BBC article "nearly 800 homes would have to be demolished to build the new runway."



He was complaining that nimbyism prevents/delays developments like this. I was pointing out, possibly badly, that it's easy to complain about the delays etc when it's not you having your home destroyed. Let's remember that these people will be FORCED to sell their homes and will be out of pocket as the homes will be brought at market rate with a little compensation on top - it takes no account that the people forced to move will then be forced to pay stamp duty, moving costs and see their hardwork on their homes and gardens destroyed.

I'm certain costs will be covered in any compulsory purchase order.

As an aside, your concerns seem to be the exact definition of a NIMBY. Personally, I prefer progress and would be happy to take a supposed hit for the greater good.
 




Westdene Seagull

aka Cap'n Carl Firecrotch
NSC Patron
Oct 27, 2003
21,526
The arse end of Hangleton
I'm certain costs will be covered in any compulsory purchase order.

As an aside, your concerns seem to be the exact definition of a NIMBY. Personally, I prefer progress and would be happy to take a supposed hit for the greater good.

Well good for you - I'd fight tooth and nail to stop anyone forcing me to sell my home against my will.
 


West Hoathly Seagull

Honorary Ruffian
Aug 26, 2003
3,544
Sharpthorne/SW11
I don't see Heathrow as 'good' but if the report authors are right then I'd simply regard it as the least bad

TBF I don't have anything other than the superficial knowledge of the arguments. I was just responding to the point that I don't believe Gatwick would offer any kind of advantage in road links ... they will be bad wherever it ends up

This is absolutely correct. Anyone who says the road links to Gatwick are adequate hasn't tried living in Sharpthorne or West Hoathly, which takes a large chunk of the traffic coming from Tunbridge Wells, Crowborough, etc, which is trying to avoid East Grinstead. An East Grinstead bypass has been rejected, so more and more traffic will try to get through. There are currently roadworks at Felbridge, leading to jams almost back to Newchapel on the A22 and Copthorne on the A264. I went through Turners Hill the other day and the traffic was stretching back to the Duke's Head roundabout. Access to Heathrow is better and will be improved further, so there is no argument for me on this issue.
 


beorhthelm

A. Virgo, Football Genius
Jul 21, 2003
36,015
From the BBC article "nearly 800 homes would have to be demolished to build the new runway."

meanwhile ITV reports "A total of 163 properties would be demolished". Look at the map, look at the plans and see which you think is closer, bearing in mind the difference between "home" and "property".
 


AmexRuislip

Retired Spy 🕵️‍♂️
Feb 2, 2014
34,764
Ruislip
Whether its the third runway or HS2, the plans will go ahead whatever the lobbiests do.
Your damned if you do :bla::bla::bla::bla:
All the people that will have to have there lives disrupted, all beacause some old in crud in goverment wants to get 'up north' quicker.
The HS2 will affect my area considerably. :eek:
 




Herr Tubthumper

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jul 11, 2003
62,697
The Fatherland




chucky1973

New member
Nov 3, 2010
8,829
Crawley
Gatwick responds to Airports Commission final recommendation



The long-awaited Airports Commission recommendation has confirmed that expansion at Gatwick is deliverable.

Disappointingly, the Airports Commission final report states that “a new Northwest runway at Heathrow, in combination with a significant package of measures to address its environmental and community impacts, presents the strongest case”; however, that Gatwick too is a “plausible, financeable and deliverable” option.

I believe Gatwick is still very much in the race. The Commission’s report makes clear that expansion at Gatwick is deliverable.

It is for the Commission to make a recommendation but it is of course for the Government to decide. So we now enter the most important stage of the process.

We are confident that when the Government makes that decision they will choose Gatwick as the only deliverable option. For instance, this report highlights the very significant environmental challenges at Heathrow such as air quality and noise impact.

Gatwick will give the country the economic benefits it needs and at the same time impact far less people. It is quicker simpler and quieter. Above all - after decades of delay - it can actually happen.
________________________________________

Stay tuned for live updates on Yammer using the topic #Still-in-the-race.
Like | Comment
 




chucky1973

New member
Nov 3, 2010
8,829
Crawley
Being a Gatwick employee at a decent level, the mood here is still very positive, the report leaves the door open in many ways for Gatwick to get the vote. There is big opinion here that MP's will not allow Heathrow.

Time will tell. Round 1 Heathrow, but this is a full 12 round fight.
 


Thunder Bolt

Silly old bat
As an aside why was Luton not considered for expansion? it is around the same distance out of London that Gatwick is, and located just off the M1, in that travelers from the North don't have to come into/around London to get to the airport.

Travelers from the north fly into Heathrow, from Manchester and Leeds/Bradford.
 


Herr Tubthumper

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jul 11, 2003
62,697
The Fatherland
Travelers from the north fly into Heathrow, from Manchester and Leeds/Bradford.

And directly to a lot of nice European places.....unfortunately.

:smile:
 




Man of Harveys

Well-known member
Jul 9, 2003
18,875
Brighton, UK
What's actually needed is a new runway at Gatwick AND at Heathrow. It's insane that a city and a hub the size of London has a total of five runways: two at Heathrow, one at Gatwick, one at Stansted, one at Luton, leaving aside that stubby little thing at City Airport.
 


The Spanish

Well-known member
Aug 12, 2008
6,478
P
I'm also surprised that Prestwick has been dismissed as surely that would assist the economy of the 'Very Northern Powerhouse'!!!

Nothing to stop the jocks developing their own infrastructure. Funny how they don't do anything themselves.
 


The Spanish

Well-known member
Aug 12, 2008
6,478
P
Travelers from the north fly into Heathrow, from Manchester and Leeds/Bradford.

What about passengers from Asia and the Americas, which is what this is about. We going to shift all them to Luton?

We need to understand what the capacity is for first before we all wade in. Luton can have all the domestics it wants but that's not the issue here.
 




wellquickwoody

Many More Voting Years
NSC Patron
Aug 10, 2007
13,912
Melbourne
What an odd piece of logic. It's not beyond a terrorist to disable two or more airports if they so choose. In fact they don't actually have to blow them up to disable them, just wait for some slightly cold or slightly hot weather and let nature do their work.

An odd piece of logic? I say terrorist attack, you say disable, could be the same thing? Surely it would be far harder to do this simultaneously at two sites instead of one? And surely the weather argument just adds to the idea that two independent sites would be better?
 


Rookie

Greetings
Feb 8, 2005
12,324
Still not sure why a new airport (such as boris island) was rejected so early on. New runway at either gatwick or Heathrow is only a short term solution, in 10-20 years this same argument will be trotted out again.
 


Westdene Seagull

aka Cap'n Carl Firecrotch
NSC Patron
Oct 27, 2003
21,526
The arse end of Hangleton
As I said, NIMBY.

I'm not arguing that I'm not - my point is that it is neither a bad thing nor surprising that people are Nimbies when the development actually destroys their homes. It was one of the many reasons I opposed a park and ride site at Patcham many years ago - it was utterly wrong that peoples homes were going to be destroyed just so people could park their cars.
 


Thunder Bolt

Silly old bat
What about passengers from Asia and the Americas, which is what this is about. We going to shift all them to Luton?

We need to understand what the capacity is for first before we all wade in. Luton can have all the domestics it wants but that's not the issue here.

I didn't mention Luton.
 




Herr Tubthumper

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jul 11, 2003
62,697
The Fatherland
What's actually needed is a new runway at Gatwick AND at Heathrow. It's insane that a city and a hub the size of London has a total of five runways: two at Heathrow, one at Gatwick, one at Stansted, one at Luton, leaving aside that stubby little thing at City Airport.

Quite. Amsterdam has 5 runways at Schiphol alone.
 


beorhthelm

A. Virgo, Football Genius
Jul 21, 2003
36,015
Still not sure why a new airport (such as boris island) was rejected so early on.

because its unworkable and/or daft. a new airport to the north west of London with suitable transport plumbed in might be the most sensible idea (50 years ago), but it would be unable to get support with public, while the incumbent air ports would lobby against it. Boris Island has to be one of the worst solutions, all the above applies plus it requires travel through or around London, new transport links over 40 miles and displace hundreds of thousands of jobs - great for south Essex and north Kent, shit for Hounslow and Hayes.
 


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top