Could Gatwick’s second runway plans be hindered by public transport rules?

Plans for Gatwick’s second runway could be hindered by a potential public transport stipulation that the airport argues is unachievable due to strikes and train capacity.

Ministers are exploring whether to impose planning rules that would mean a second Gatwick runway could only open if 54 per cent of passengers arriving at the airport use public transport to get there.

The number of passengers using buses or trains to get to Gatwick before their flight would have to rise by 10 per cent if ministers imposed these rules. In 2022 and 2023, 44 per cent of passengers arrived via public transport.

However, the airport has argued that the persistent problems that public transport faces, including staff strikes, train capacity and timetabling, means that there is a limited chance to push up the figures, The Times reports.

Gatwick’s second runway is currently only available for aircraft as a taxiway, and is in operation only when the main runway is out of use.

Gatwick asserts that the rules on public transport were “unnecessary, unreasonable and should not be imposed”.

Transport secretary Heidi Alexander has until 27 February to decide whether to grant the airport a development consent order (DCO) to expand.

In August 2024, the planning inspectorate’s examination of the runway plans concluded, so it is now over to the government to make a final decision on the proposal.

The planning inspectorate’s requirement is that “at least 54 per cent of passengers travelling to the airport used public transport in the monitored year [the year before the runway enters operation], the outlet reported.

“Should this public transport mode share not be achieved then the undertaker shall not use the following: (i) Simultaneous operational use of the northern runway; and (ii) Pier 7 [a new 101,000 square metre terminal extension] and associated stands.”

In a letter to Ms Alexander, Tim Norwood, Gatwick’s chief planning officer, wrote in response: “As currently worded this draft requirement would entirely prevent the use of (and therefore, in reality, investment in) this nationally important infrastructure if a forecast mode share target was not met, no matter how small or immaterial the level of non-achievement.”

“A requirement not to operate nationally important infrastructure (after investing billons [sic] of…