7/23/2019 London City Airport Compulsory Purchase Order

1/3

Secretary of State for TransportGreat Mister House33 Horseferry RoadLondonSW1 4 DR

30th November 2015

The London City Airport (King George V Dock) Compulsory Purchase Order 2015.The Airports Act 1986 and the Acquisition of Land Act 1981.

Executed by London City Airport Limited on 15 October 2015.

Dear Sir,

I wish to state my objection to the London City Airport Compulsory Order (CPO) 2015 as statedabove.

The CPO would allow London City Airport (LCA) to implement the planning application CADP113/01228/FUL in full, if the Mayor of London Boris Johnson's (MoL) ruling is overturned following thePublic Enquiry APP/G5750/W/15/3035673 due for hearing in March 2016.

Even if the MoL Decision is upheld, the CPO of the land could allow LCY to fulfil and complete13/01228/FUL partly, or in full, carried out under the permitted development process or otherplanning rules.

The CPO could result in the devaluation, or making valueless, surrounding lands owned by GLA Landand Property Ltd as well as land and home owner assets not included in this application.

Number on Map Description of Land

L1, L2, L3, L4, L5, L6, L7 , L8,

L9

Approximately 4763 square metres of land, access roads, service yard and

private highway in the vicinity of London City Airport and the London CityAirport Docklands Light Railway Station.

L10, L11, L12a, L12b, L12c,L12d, L12e, L12f, L12g, L13

Approximately 94537 square metres of land comprising o0f dock and bedthereof within King George V Dock, including dolphin structures and located tothe east of London City Airport, south of the existing East Pier at London CityAirport and north of private highway (Hartmann Road)

L14, L15, L16, L17 Approximately 12574 square metres of private highway (Hartmann Road) tothe south of King George V Dock.

L18 Approximately 124 square metres of public adopted highway (HartmannRoad) at its junction with Fishguard Way.

7/23/2019 London City Airport Compulsory Purchase Order

2/3

The approach of covering over the Docks is in conflict with paragraph 7.84 of the London Plan whichconfirms that Londons waterspaces should not be used as an extension of Londons developableland. The proposed extension of the Airport over the docks would be contrary to the developmentplan.

The LCA expansion plan is in breach of the London Plan Policy on the Blue Ribbon Network

The King George V Dock is part of the Blue Ribbon Network (BRN) and the proposed developmentover the dock is contrary to Policy 7.28 and 7.84 of the London Plan (and hence the DevelopmentPlan). The London Plan states development proposals should enhance the BRN . Para 7.28 relatesto the restoration of the BRN and development proposals should restore and enhance it bypreventing development and structures into the water space unless it serves a water related purpose.

Policy 7.15 requires development proposals to reduce noise and minimise the existing and potentialadverse impacts of noise, on, from, within, or in the vicinity of development proposals. Separate newnoise sensitive development from major noise sources wherever practical.

The Mayor of London is one of the largest public sector landowners in London and, by default,Londoners. 34 parcels of this land is in the Royal Docks and surrounding area and any increase inland value due to a RODMA development strategy will benefit London as a whole. This CPO maydevalue and erode this strategy.

The KGV Dock is part of the Royal Docks, which regional and local planning policy identifies as a Siteof Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC).Newham Core Strategy, Policy 4, seeks to protest,enhance and create habitats for biodiversity across Newham.Expansion of LCA over a large area ofKGV Dock is not in keeping with this policy.

Newham Core Policy S3 allocates the docks as a unique and high quality waterfront urban quarter.

The areas key assets, namely the open water and remaining historic buildings and structures of thedocks, riverside views and access, and Victorian heritage of North Woolwich around the station andRoyal Victoria Gardens, will be re-valued and enhanced, ensuring that they form an integral part ofthe areas future in line with Newham Policies SP5 and INF7

The LCA Masterplan (2006) sets out development plans through to 2030, proposing that the airportwill have 8 million passengers per annum (p.a.) by 2030. This equates to approximately 180,000 airtraffic movements p.a. LCA propose this is accommodated by maximising the use of the existingrunway, improving flight occupancy and creating better facilities for passengers. Such an increasewould also necessitate an enlarged Public Safety Zone and may impact adversely on the

development potential of sites around the Royal Docks. Future growth at the airport in line with theMasterplan will need to be carefully considered to ensure the potential impacts on the Royal Docksand its future role and function are taken into account.

The proposals also conflict in terms of Heritage impacts. Whilst the preservation of the existing dockhas not merited statutory protection as confirmed by English Heritage, the loss and alteration of partof the dock will have a local heritage impact that cannot be mitigated against.

English Heritage have advised the proposed development would cause harm to the significance ofthe dock arising from the paving over which would obscure appreciation of a significant part of theimpounded water. The current visible scale and extent of the water is a key aspect of its historicinterest relating to the form and function of the dock.

7/23/2019 London City Airport Compulsory Purchase Order

3/3

Policy 7.8 of the London Plan 2011 details that development affecting heritage assets should strive toconserve their significance and, furthermore, states that new development should make provision forthe protection of significant memorials. Part B of Policy 7.30 of the London Plan (Canals and otherRivers and Waterspaces) seeks to protect the vitality, attractiveness and historical interest.

Policy SP5: Heritage and other Successful Place-making Assets of Newhams Core Strategy, outlines

the value of heritage and other assets which contribute to local character and successful places willbe recognised by protection, conservation, and enhancement of the assets and their settings.Therefore, proposals that address the need to conserve and enhance designated and non-designated assets will be supported.

It is my view that the Secretary of State should reject any Compulsory Purchase for the reason I havelisted above.

Yours faithfully