As a Brit with an interest in aviation development, I welcomed the U.K. government's long-awaited decision on airport expansion in the London area, which came Oct. 25 with the announcement that Heathrow Airport had been chosen as the site for a new runway.

The sense of relief was palpable as 30 years of campaigning and delaying a decision culminated in what, for most, seemed the most logical choice. With it, the government has assured that its unanimous decision on Heathrow will mean "jobs and growth" for the country as it faces a new future outside of Europe.

For those who will be affected directly by the development — including residents and businesses to the north of Heathrow — and those against expansion on environmental grounds, the decision was naturally a difficult one to accept.

With the dust settling on the announcement, there is a difficult road ahead for all involved as, despite the 30 years of rallying for the new runway, the real negotiations and planning now begin. Prime Minister Theresa May has set a deadline of 2025 to have the runway operational

"We want the benefits of a new runway as quickly as possible, but we will also make sure London and taxpayers get a good deal," May said.

A look at the planned third runway at London's Heathrow Airport.

No one can claim the process has been rushed. In the time it took for discussions about which London airport would be permitted a new runway, rival European hubs at Amsterdam, Frankfurt, Madrid, Munich and Paris have all opened new runways.

Now, with the country negotiating its future trade and economy post-Brexit, the timing is vital to ensure Heathrow — which has already slipped in global rankings — can compete on the world stage and remain a fitting gateway to the United Kingdom.

It is currently unable to effectively connect to all the domestic and regional airports it would like to due to slot constraints and the excessive costs airlines face in securing them. One of the key outcomes from the decision is a commitment to enable new routes to airports around the country that are currently without a link to the capital.

The next stages in the process lie primarily in ensuring the expansion can meet the stringent new limits on air quality. Transport Secretary Chris Grayling discussed the need to make sure the increase in both aircraft movements (up to 700,000 per year with the new runway) and road traffic delivering passengers and service vehicles to the airport do not diminish the quality of life for those living in the city.

"Our strategy is to address the issue of emissions in the short term rather than the long term," Grayling told the Evening Standard. "We think our national air quality plan will enable this project to meet air quality limits. But our ambitions are much bigger than that — we want to address air quality across the whole country."

Heathrow expansion has plenty of high-profile critics, including London Mayor Sadiq Khan and Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson, who had championed building an entirely new airport to replace Gatwick and Heathrow. Other vocal groups campaigning against the decision include Greenpeace, preservation groups and residents who would see their communities demolished and displaced under the new development, which is set to cause chaos to the local transport infrastructure during construction.

"The most important thing is to get on with it," said John Allan, chairman of business group London First. "Even though it is only a step in the road, it is a very important step in the road."

If this decision is blocked or turned around, it may placate campaigners, but it will not solve the fact that London's airports are at a breaking point and not able to grow with demand at a critical time for the country's economy.