Non Technical Summary l April 2008
Introduction
London City Airport Limited (the Applicant)
March 2008. This asked the Applicant to
With consent, the expansion in the
is applying for permission from the London
provide additional information in relation to
Airport's business over the next three
Borough of Newham to vary conditions
the projected changes to the Public Safety
years is estimated to generate around 960
attached to the planning permission, first
Zones (PSZs) to accommodate the
additional direct, indirect and induced jobs
granted in 1985 and varied subsequently
proposed increase in aircraft movements,
and an additional income of some £39
as the Airport has grown over the past 20
and any consequent effects on the
million per year into the local economy.
years. This is in order that the Airport can
development potential of neighbouring sites,
Taking account of the projected PSZs (which
continue to develop in a managed way
including a full assessment of the economic
may be overestimated), the net effect of the
over the next few years, ensuring that the
implications of the projected PSZs on the
proposal is an increase of 481 full time
environmental impacts of its operations
regional and national economy. In addition,
equivalent (FTE) jobs and the net additional
remain within acceptable limits.
the Council requested an assessment of the
income would be £26 million per annum to
implications ('cumulative effects') of future
the local economy. This alternative
This document is a Non-Technical
noise levels arising from the expansion of
assessment of net employment and income
Summary of the Environmental Statement
the Airport on the development of three
assumes that the development aspirations at
submitted with the planning application
Opportunity Areas identified in the London
four sites in proximity to the Airport would be
(the Application). It has been further
Plan (Consolidated with Amendments since
curtailed to some degree by the potential
updated (in both December 2007 and April
2004), as well as the three spatial options for
change to the PSZs. However, this
2008) to incorporate a summary of additional
the future development of Newham identified
outcome, in terms of theoretical 'foregone' or
information submitted to the Council to
in the Council's "Core Strategy - Issues and
'displaced' jobs, does not take account of the
supplement the original Environmental
Options" (February 2008). Finally,
uncertainty over whether such developments
Statement (ES). It is intended to be
clarification was also sought regarding
would ultimately obtain planning permission,
understood by professional and laypersons
proposals for waste management at the
nor that existing jobs might be displaced or
alike, so that they can gain an
Airport. This information has been provided
lost from these four sites. The criteria
understanding of the main components of
in full in a document entitled the
applied to this revised assessment are
the Proposals in the Application and the
'Environmental Statement Second
explained below together with an explanation
likely significance of environmental effects
Addendum' (hereafter referred to as the
of why the projected PSZs are likely to
which would occur were permission to be
Second ES Addendum).
overestimate risk.
granted. The Environmental Statement
was prepared following the completion of
The additional text provided in this Non-
There are also forecast to be substantial,
an Environmental Impact Assessment
Technical Summary (shown in blue and
less readily quantifiable, benefits to the
(EIA) by RPS and other expert
green) provides an overview of the further
local and wider London economy.
consultants, on behalf of the Applicant.
information included in the First and Second
These beneficial effects need to be
ES Addendums respectively. Any necessary
balanced against some predicted increases
The Council requested further information on
editorial changes to the original text, as a
in noise close to the Airport (both airborne
20 November 2007 following its
consequence of recent policy changes or
and on the ground), changes to traffic on
consideration and consultation on the
announcements, or changes to correct a
local roads, and other local effects which
planning application and ES. This request
number of minor inaccuracies in the original
are a consequence of the general
was issued in accordance with Regulation
version are shown as being scored through
intensification of activity at the Airport.
19 of the EIA Regulations 1999, which
with replacement text in blue and green.
requires that further information should be
This Application falls under section 73 of
The potential impact of the proposals on
publicised and consulted upon in the same
the Town and Country Planning Act 1990
the regeneration potential of permitted and
manner as the original ES. The points raised
(as amended) and, if granted, the variation
allocated sites in and around the Royal
in the Council's first Regulation 19 letter
of conditions will facilitate the projected
Docks area has also been considered and
related mainly to matters of clarification on
growth of the Airport to around 2010. By
a separate Regeneration Statement
the original assessment work as well as
this time, there are expected to be
prepared and appended to the
requesting further data and figures on noise,
120,000 aircraft movements per year
Environmental Statement. This has been
air quality and transportation effects. This
accommodating some 3.9 million
supplemented by a more detailed economic
information has now been provided in full in
passengers, the majority of whom will be
evaluation of any effects that the projected
a document entitled the 'Environmental
travelling for business reasons in line with
PSZs might have on neighbouring sites,
Statement Addendum' (ES Addendum). This
the Airport's existing customer profile. The
including both those with planning consents
is referred to as the First ES Addendum in
growth of the Airport will also continue to
to develop and those without.
the text below.
serve the travel, employment and other
community-based needs of local residents
The growth aspirations of London City
A second Regulation 19 request for further
and workers within Newham and
Airport are in accordance with national
information was issued by the Council on 7
neighbouring Boroughs.
policy as expressed in the Government's
1
Non Technical Summary l April 2008
Air Transport White Paper and its more
late afternoon peak periods, rather than
on other days, barring exceptional
recent Progress Report, whereby airports
creating a significant increase in activity
circumstances.
are urged to make maximum use of their
throughout the day. In this respect, the
existing runways and infrastructure in
pattern of movements will remain much as
The Airport is also presently subject to a
order to accommodate future demand
today.
planning condition that limits the number
without the need to build new runways. In
of 'noise-factored' movements to 73,000
October 2007, the Department for Transport
The existing limits allow for 73,000 Air
per year. This system works on the basis
published, "Towards a Sustainable Transport
Transport Movements (ATMs) per year, as
of allocating each aircraft type a 'noise
System - Supporting Growth in a Low
defined by the existing planning
factor' of A, B, C, D or E depending on its
Carbon World". This document reaffirms the
permission, plus an unregulated number of
departure noise profile. So, for example,
Government's approach to aviation, that is,
general aviation movements, mostly
an A-rated aircraft counts as 1.26
to make the most of existing airports through
comprising corporate jets from the
movements whereas a B-rated aircraft
a process of improvement and
corporate aviation building (known as the
counts as 0.63 movements. Further
modernisation, including making more use of
"Jet Centre"). The commercial airline and
clarification of this noise categorisation
existing runways and building extra terminal
corporate aviation businesses have grown
system and how it would continue to apply to
capacity (paragraph 3.40). The paper also
progressively over the past four years
future aircraft wishing to use the Airport has
emphasises that the UK is taking a strong
(See Figure 1). Corporate aviation refers
been provided in the First ES Addendum.
lead in promoting the inclusion of aviation in
to the ownership and operation of aircraft
the European Union Emissions Trading
by individuals and companies in
Because of the type of aircraft that used
Scheme (EU ETS), which would ensure that
conducting their business and therefore
the Airport when the system was first
any growth in emissions would have to be
not for public hire.
introduced (including a much greater
matched by a corresponding reduction from
proportion of smaller turbo-prop aircraft
elsewhere within the trading scheme (i.e.
In 2006, there were approximately 13,700
which are quieter on take-off but noisier on
other industries). The longer-term
aircraft movements from the Jet Centre,
arrival), the annual noise-factored total
aspirations of the Airport are for it to
62% of which were not classified under the
tended to be lower than the ATM value.
continue to develop, in a phased manner,
ATM definition. The new limit of 120,000
up until 2030 as set out in a Master Plan
per year will therefore bring all aircraft
However, this ratio has changed in recent
that was published for consultation in
under a single total movement cap.
years and in 2006 there were
March 2006, and finalised in November
approximately 71,000 ATMs and 72,200
2006.
The Application also proposes to vary
noise-factored movements, reflecting the
other planning restrictions including a
increasing numbers of modern turbo-
This 'Interim Application' as it has been
related increase in the number of daily and
fan/regional jets using the Airport. To
termed, is intended to allow for an initial
weekly movements, and on bank holidays
accommodate this trend, a new limit of
phase of growth in aircraft movements and
and other occasions. However, the hours
135,000 noise-factored movements per
involves no new built infrastructure beyond
of operation will not change, such that the
year is being sought as part of the
that already existing or approved. The
24 hour 'no-flight' period at weekends will
application.
Application is in accordance with, although
be preserved and flights will not be
not dependent upon, the Master Plan
allowed after 10.30pm or before 6.30am
proposals. The future, long term physical
growth of London City Airport will be the
subject of separate planning applications
accompanied by environmental and other
assessments, so that the planning
authorities can judge those proposals on
their own merits.
Nature of the Interim
Application
The Applicant proposes to increase the
number of overall aircraft movements from
approximately 80,000 (scheduled and
general aviation flights) to 120,000 by
2010, an increase of some 50% on the
2006 level of activity. However, most of
these new flights are likely to be
concentrated in the existing morning and
Figure 1: Growth of London City Airport 2000-2010
2
Non Technical Summary l April 2008
Environmental Impact
Assessment (EIA)
To identify the likely environmental effects
June 2007. This 'opinion' has been taken
· Flood Risk, Water Quality and Ground
of the proposals and to determine, where
into account in the final preparation of the
Conditions
appropriate, the ways of avoiding,
Environmental Statement and in other
· Microclimate (Wind and
reducing, compensating or enhancing such
reports submitted with the Application,
Daylight/Sunlight)
effects (collectively known as 'mitigation
namely:
· Vibration
measures'), an EIA study has been
completed. A comprehensive
· Sustainability Appraisal and Carbon
Therefore, the above issues have been
Environmental Statement has been
Analysis Report (further updated to
scoped-out of the EIA and an account is
prepared which reports on the results of
include an executive summary and
given of the rationale for their exclusion in
this process, in accordance with the Town
additional information on energy, water,
a chapter of the Environmental Statement
and Country Planning (Environmental
waste and other sustainability issues)
entitled "Non-significant Issues". The
Impacts Assessment) (England and Wales)
· Planning Statement
issues of energy and carbon dioxide
Regulations 1999. The First and Second ES
· Regeneration Statement (appended to
emissions, whilst not considered to be
Addendums provides further information in
the Environmental Statement)
significant effects in the context of the
order to clarify and expand upon the
· Health Impact Assessment
Application and the EIA Regulations, are
assessment findings, as well as identify. It
nonetheless considered in detail in the
also proposes additional mitigation
In addition to the First ES Addendum, other
Sustainability Appraisal and Carbon
measures and enhancements to current
documents have now been were prepared
Analysis Report - the Airport shares the
environmental controls, that the Airport is
by the Applicant and its advisors to respond
view of the Council that these are
committed to introduce in conjunction with
to a number of further (non-EIA) matters that
important concerns and is committed to
this application.
have been were raised on the Interim
developing a Carbon Management Strategy
Application by the Council, statutory
that will seek to manage greenhouse gas
The EIA considered both adverse and
consultation bodies, the public and other
emissions that can be directly and indirectly
beneficial effects of the proposals,
interested Third Parties. These include:
influenced by the Airport it.
considering a range of topics such as:
surface transport and access; noise from
· Design and Access Statement (DAS) -
As part of the pre-planning consultation
airborne, ground and traffic sources; air
although the Application does not include
undertaken by the Applicant, meetings
quality effects; socio-economics; and
any operational development, a DAS has
were held with various organisations
waste.
been prepared by RPS.
including the LB Newham, Transport for
· Policy and Operational Supplement -
London, the Government Office for London
Certain topics, which are commonly
prepared by RPS to address the
and other bodies. LB Newham also
considered in EIA studies of development
remaining matters raised by the Council
consulted various statutory authorities
applications, were deemed not to be
in its first regulation 19 letter, and by
such as the Environment Agency, Natural
relevant in this instance, principally
consultees, with regards to flight paths,
England, London Thames Gateway
because the Application does not include
airspace capacity and reorganisation,
Development Corporation, and the
any building or physical works to the
general and business aviation, the impact
neighbouring boroughs of Greenwich and
Airport. Also, because the Application
of the proposals on other airports in the
Tower Hamlets with regards to the
relates to a continuation of existing
South East, carbon dioxide emissions,
proposed scope of the EIA. Their
operations at the Airport, albeit with an
incremental development and the
responses are included and addressed in
increase in the intensity of activity, many
Olympics.
the Environmental Statement. Additional
of the environmental and other
consultations by the Airport, Newham
management controls in place at the
These documents can be viewed at the
Council and the neighbouring Boroughs
Airport already provide mitigation and so
London Borough of Newham Council
have been ongoing since the Application
do not need to be re-examined. The
Offices, together with the full Environmental
was submitted in August 2007. Many of the
effectiveness of such existing controls is
Statement or on the Council’s website:
queries and issues raised during the
borne-out by the good relationship the
http://newham.gov.uk
consultation period to-date were
Airport has with the local community and
incorporated into the Council's Regulation 19
regulatory authorities and the consistently
The following issues were not considered
letter, and thereby are answered within the
low number of complaints received. The
relevant to the EIA, or to the above
First and Second ES Addendums. These
proposed coverage of the Environmental
additional studies:
and other representations will be considered
Statement was set out in a Scoping Report
in the Council's determination of the
submitted to the London Borough of
· Townscape and Visual Effects
application.
Newham in April 2007. A draft Scoping
· Archaeology and Cultural Heritage
Opinion was then issued by LBN on 21
· Ecology and Nature Conservation
3
Non Technical Summary l April 2008
The Site
London City Airport is located in the Royal
The Applicant is committed to improving its
the environmental impact of it’s operations
Docks, between King George V Dock to the
already good environmental record and
already exist at the Airport as listed in the box
south and Albert Dock to the north. The
ensuring that the future growth of the Airport is
opposite below: Additional measures, both
Airport is approximately 9.5km (6 miles) east
delivered in a sustainable manner. A variety of
new and existing, have been added to this
of the City of London, approximately 3.2 km
measures to manage, minimise and report on
table.
(2 miles) east of Canary Wharf and
approximately 800m (1/2 mile) from the
ExCeL Exhibition and Conference Centre.
The site is 48.5 hectares in size and
·
Maintaining restrictions on flights outside the daytime period and for an uninterrupted 24
includes a single runway, the 'apron' area
hour period at weekends.
(where aircraft park to embark and
·
Operation of a Noise Monitoring and Flight Track Keeping System.
disembark passengers), a main passenger
·
Maintaining a steeper glide slope approach (5.5 degrees) for all aircraft.
terminal, the Jet Centre, and other
·
Minimising aircraft idle and taxiing times in conjunction with National Air Traffic Services
operational buildings. The runway is
(NATS).
surrounded by the water of the Royal Albert
·
Continuous monitoring of air quality within the Airport site and the placement of air
Dock and the King George V Dock. See
quality monitoring 'nitrogen dioxide diffusion tubes' at key locations around the Airport,
Figure 2 below.
including residential areas.
·
The results of this monitoring programme are reported to the Council on a quarterly
In 2005, the Airport was connected to
basis, and in the future will be published in an annual report made available to the
London's public transport rail system via a
public.
dedicated Docklands Light Railway (DLR)
·
Using electric vehicles and Fixed Electrical Ground Power (FEGP), thereby minimising
station which links directly into the Airport's
the use of on-board Auxiliary Power Units (APUs).
main passenger terminal.
·
Encouraging aircraft operators to adopt quiet operating practices and to observe
published noise abatement procedures.
The Airport is also easily accessible by road,
·
Maintaining a Sound Insulation Grant Scheme using a stringent eligibility criterion of 57
being located 1.6km (1 mile) from the A13,
dB Laeq 16h - a lower limit than at any other UK airport and in the future improving
4.8km (3 miles) from the North Circular
the scheme further by considering as a condition of the planning permission,
(A406) and 24.1km (15 miles) from the M25.
introduce a two tier scheme to further protect those most affected by noise.
The Docklands Highway network links the
·
Implementation of an enhanced waste recycling scheme Waste Management Plan
Airport to Canary Wharf, Tower Hill and the
(with the objective of recycling 10% waste by the end of 2007 and a further 10% in 2008
centre of London. This transport network is
and ongoing targets thereafter) , to be incorporated into a formal Environmental
illustrated in Figure 3.
Management System (EMS) to be finalised in 2008. This will follow the principles of
the 'Waste Hierarchy' with efforts focussed firstly on preventing and reducing waste
Current Operations
at source, then options to reuse and recycle waste, rather than it going to landfill.
·
Various water conservation measures including water-less urinals and sensor-driven taps
London City Airport serves a primarily business
systems, both airside and landside, to include annual targets be incorporated into the
travel market, providing services to both
EMS.
domestic and European destinations. The
·
A noise and environmental impact complaint handling system.
Airport has grown progressively since its
·
Maintaining an Airport Consultative Committee.
opening in 1987 and 12 airlines now operate
·
Various local training, education, recruitment/ job placements, community and charitable
services to over 30 destinations, catering for
initiatives run by the Airport.
approximately 2.38 million passengers per
·
Preparation and distribution of a Community & Environment Report (2007) regularly.
annum (mppa) in 2006.
·
To properly implement a 'penalties and credits' system to reward or penalise airline
operators dependent on their level of performance against the Airport's Standard
The Airport, due to its unique location, is a
Operating Procedures.
popular airport for European and domestic
·
To introduce an enhanced environmental noise reporting system, including periodic
business travellers because of its ease of
community environmental reports.
access, particularly to the City and Canary
·
Upgrading/extending the height of the existing 4m high blast barrier to the west of the
Wharf, and simplicity of use; being fast, efficient
existing terminal pier, to further reduce ground noise effects of aircraft on Stands 12 to
and friendly. The Airport's main passenger
14 on locations close to the Airport apron, and in particular existing residences at Camel
terminal provides facilities for scheduled airline
Road.
services, whilst the Jet Centre provides a
·
To pilot an innovative monitoring programme to measure odours within and around the
dedicated service for corporate aviation
Airport, and if successful to implement such monitoring on a routine basis.
passengers.
4
Non Technical Summary l April 2008
Interim Application - The Proposals
Context to the Application
In 2003, the Government published its Air
areas, as well as Canary Wharf and the City.
Transport White Paper (ATWP) - 'The Future of
The Applicant has forecast that if planning
Air Transport'. The White Paper sets out a
permission were to be granted to increase
strategic framework for the development of
the overall number of aircraft movements to
airport capacity in the UK over the next 25
120,000, the Airport will be able to
years to 2030. The ATWP clarifies the need for
accommodate approximately 3.9 mppa by
new runway capacity in South East England
2010. The environmental and socio-
and urges airports to make maximum use of
economic effects of this growth, measured
existing runway capacity. These Government
for the 2010 'principal assessment year' and
objectives were reiterated most recently in the
compared to the 'without consent' (or 'Base
ATWP Progress Report of December 2006
Case') scenario, have been reported in the
drafted after taking full account of the Stern
Environmental Statement and are
Report, and in its more recent consultation
summarised Table 1.
paper "Towards a Sustainable Transport
System". The latter document draws upon Sir
Rod Eddington's Transport Study (December
2006) that confirmed the vital link between
transport, including air transport, and the
economy.
In 2003, London City Airport Limited obtained
planning consent for various 'operational
improvements' including the construction of a
runway hold (now built), an eastern apron
extension for new aircraft stands (currently
under construction), and an 8,750 sq m floor
area extension to the Airport terminal building.
The new stands are due to be completed in the
next twelve months with the terminal building
extension to follow.
In 2006, London City Airport handled 2.38
million passengers per annum (mppa).
London City Airport Limited has determined
that, without replacing the existing
Figure 2: Current Site Configuration/ Land Uses
movement limits, the further growth of the
Airport will effectively be checked and the
Airport will be unable to handle more than
2.5 mppa by 2010. Even accounting for the
possibility of off-setting some development
potential of four sites that fall partially within
the projected PSZs, the consequence of this
'without consent' scenario would be £39 £26
million less income to the area and 960 481
fewer full time equivalent (FTE) jobs
compared to the Proposals in the
Application, and the displacement of
passengers (and possibly airline operators)
to other airports. This displacement of
passengers and business would have
secondary impacts in terms of increased
journey times, less sustainable surface travel
patterns and the possibility that new
companies would be discouraged from
locating in the Royals and other regeneration
Figure 3: Transport Network
5
Non Technical Summary l April 2008
Baseline Conditions and
Assessment Scenarios
2006 'Current Situation'
The 2006 calendar year has been adopted
Scheduled
GA/Jet Centre Total
Classified Air
Noise
Total
as the 'Current Situation' as this provides a
Movements
Movements
Transport
Factored
Passengers
validated set of data for aircraft movements
Movements
Movements
(Pax)
and passenger throughput over a 12 month
(ATMs)
period, as shown in Table 1.
65,860
13,756**
79,616
71,016
72,247
2,377,318
Table 1: Summary of Aircraft Movements During 2006*
*Please note that in the ES these figures may be rounded up for ease of
2010 'Base Case' (Without Consent)
interpretation.
**5156 (or 38%) of these movements were designated ATMs
The 2010 Base Case (Without Consent) has
ATMS/
GA/Jet
Total
Classified Air Noise
Average
Total
been used to demonstrate the predicted
Scheduled
Centre**
Movements Transport
Factored
Load factor Passengers
growth of the Airport in the event that the
Movements
Movements
Movements (%)
(Pax)
Interim Application is not agreed approved.
(ATMs)
It is projected that the current limit of 73,000
66,000
14,000
80,000
71,000
73,000
58%
2,500,000*
noise factored movements and/or the
equivalent ATM limit would be reached by
Table 2 - Summary of Aircraft Movements in 2010 (Without Consent)
*assumes 1.6 Pax per GA movement = 20,800
the end of 2007 or early 2008. Only a very
**includes approximately 40% classified as ATMs.
small increase (approximately 5%) in
passenger numbers is expected by 2010
within the constraints of the current planning
conditions. Further, limited enhancements
would only be possible through improving
scheduling efficiency and increasing the
'load factor' on aircraft, but the Airport itself
cannot directly dictate either of these
improvements.
The 2010 Base Case (Without Consent) is
summarised in Table 2.
2010 Scheme (With Consent)
The 2010 Scheme (With Consent) has been
Scheduled
GA/Jet Centre Total
Noise Factored Average Load Total
used to demonstrate the predicted growth of
Movements
Movements
Movements
factor (%)
Passengers
the Airport by the year 2010 on the basis
(Pax)
that all the proposed variations to the
95,000
25,000
120,000
135,000
55%
3,900,000
existing planning conditions are granted.
Table 3 - Summary of Aircraft Movements in 2010 ‘With Consent’
Elevating the limit of aircraft movements to
120,000 would accommodate the continued
growth and allow the Airport to handle
approximately 3.9 mppa by the year 2010.
This 120,000 total movements would be
likely to comprise of the order of 95,000
scheduled airline movements and 25,000 Jet
Centre movements - this fleet mix forms the
'Primary Assessment Case' in the EIA.
The 2010 (With Consent) assessment case
is summarised in Table 3.
6
Non Technical Summary l April 2008
Sensitivity Testing
Although the Primary Assessment Case outlined
meets the transport objectives of relevant policies
applying an uplift of 20% more aircraft
above gives the most likely mix of aircraft by
in terms of accessibility, transport effects,
passengers departing and arriving at the
2010, the total cap of 120,000 allows for
sustainability measures and design.
Airport in the morning peak, with 60% using
different outcomes. In other words, the
the DLR. In this scenario, there will be an
business demand from either the commercial
London City Airport is currently accessible by all
average of 10 additional person trips per
airlines or the Jet Centre could exceed
modes of transport, and in particular, by public
train, with the 15 trains an hour service.
expectations. The EIA has therefore considered
transport modes. Approximately 65 79% of the
Such an increased patronage will again
two further scenarios within a range that might
passengers arriving and departing from the
make no noticeable difference to the
be considered plausible, although unlikely.
Airport travel via the DLR, taxis and buses,
performance or convenience of the DLR.
These are presented as 'sensitivity tests' in
whilst the remaining passengers use private,
order to determine whether the impacts
rented and chauffeur-driven vehicles. The
Under the application proposals, the peak
associated with such scenarios would be
Surface Transport and Access assessment has
period taxi usage will remain high,
materially different from the Primary Assessment
evaluated the increase in passengers travelling
encouraged by a proposed 'Taxi Share'
Case of 95,000 scheduled movements with
to and from the Airport in 2010, and has
scheme to increase taxi occupancy and
25,000 GA/ Jet Centre movements.
determined the likely impacts of this increase on
efficiency, to be introduced at the Airport as
all modes of surface transport, in both the 'with'
part of its Travel Plan. The proportion of
The two additional 2010 (With Consent)
and 'without' consent scenarios.
passengers using private cars will reduce,
scenarios are as follows:
but from an already low base.
The assessment highlights that the current
· 85,000 scheduled airline movements and
capacity of the DLR to accommodate the
The Proposal has also been assessed in terms
35,000 GA/Jet Centre movements,
predicted increase in passenger numbers is
of its impact on road traffic, although no extra
delivering approximately 3.5mppa; and
sufficient and would equate to is less than a
car parking is required or proposed. It was
· 105,000 scheduled airline movements and
6% increase of the capacity of a 2 car train
found that the Proposals are likely to have only
15,000 GA/Jet Centre movements,
based on the existing service frequency of 8
a minor impact on the local road network as
delivering approximately 4.3mppa.
trains per hour. This increase in passengers
additional traffic resulting from the increased
would not change the character or performance
passengers travelling to and from the Airport is
The ES concludes that the environmental
of the current services. in total DLR passenger
predicted to be generally less than 5% on all
effects of these two scenarios would not be
numbers. Furthermore, the extension of the
roads serving the Airport.
significantly different from the Primary
DLR to Woolwich Arsenal by 2009 will
Assessment Case.
provide additional capacity and improve
The two closest road junctions to the Airport
access to the Airport, particularly for
were also tested using standard computer
The following sections provide a summary of the
passengers travelling from the south-east.
modelling programs and both were found to
EIA findings for the main assessment topics and
have spare capacity. No significant queues or
includes additional findings from the further work
It has been demonstrated that the Interim
delays were predicted to arise from the
reported in the First and Second ES
Application proposals do not require or rely
Proposals, and the impacts here can therefore
Addendums.
on a three-car service operating on the DLR.
be considered negligible. As no built works or
The Transport Assessment forecasts an
changes to existing facilities are required to
Surface Transport and Access
additional demand for travel on the DLR to
accommodate the increase in aircraft
be 15 people per train (8 per carriage) in the
movements, there will be no effects from
The ES has considered the potential effects of
morning peak period as a result of the uplift
construction vehicles on the local road network
the proposed increase in aircraft movements,
in passengers passing through the Airport.
as a result of the Proposals.
and the corresponding increase in passenger
This will not noticeably change the
numbers travelling to and from the Airport, on the
experience of travelling by the DLR and will
A study of the potential increase in service
surface transport system to the year 2010. The
not result in any significant change in
vehicles at the Airport has shown that there
Proposals have also been assessed against
convenience for passengers.
will be an insignificant change in such
relevant national, regional and local transport
vehicles, either on the wider highway
policies. It was concluded that the proposal
Furthermore, the extension of the DLR to
network or within the Airport site itself.
Woolwich Arsenal by 2009 will provide
additional capacity by increasing the number
The Applicant proposes to implement an
of trains from the present level of 8 trains per
update to its Travel Plan (a further draft of
hour to 15 per hour and this extension will
which has been discussed and agreed in
improve access to the Airport, particularly for
principle with the Officers of the Council and
passengers travelling from the south-east.
is included and appendix to the First ES
This may increase the proportion of
Adendum). is included in the ES) building
passengers using the DLR, from 44% at
upon its The Travel Plan builds on the Airport's
present to up to 60%. The ES Addendum
surface Access Strategy of 2005, with the
reports on the findings of a 'sensitivity test'
objective of increasing the proportion of staff
London City Airport DLR
7
Non Technical Summary l April 2008
and passengers using non single occupancy
Report". This has demonstrated that the
The Environmental Statement followed
private car transport, using public transport
increase in air noise would not preclude or
current Government guidance in adopting
and improving the efficiency of all travel.
inhibit development in any of these areas.
the noise contour band of 57 dB LAeq,16h
Specific measures to achieve this aim
This is discussed further below (see
as the threshold for the onset of significant
include the introduction of a 'car share'
Cumulative Effects section).
community annoyance. However, as
scheme for employees and a managed 'taxi
requested by LB Newham, the results of the
share' scheme.
The guidance contained in PPG 24 suggests
recent ANASE study and the relevance of
that daytime air noise should be taken into
this study to the Airport has been
Air, Ground and Road Traffic
account when it exceeds 57 dB LAeq,16h,
considered. The ANASE study suggests that
Noise
which is regarded as the onset of significant
the onset of community annoyance is
community annoyance. As such, air noise
occurring at lower levels of exposure to
The ES has considered the likely effects of
impacts have been assessed by identifying
aircraft noise (just over 50 dB LAeq,16h). It
air noise, ground noise and road traffic noise
the relative changes to the area, and
was concluded that the change in noise level
as a result of the proposed increase in
associated population numbers, within this
expected as a result of the Application, even
aircraft movements.
lower contour (i.e. 57dB Laeq 16h). These
when assessed under ANASE, is unlikely to
population counts have been further clarified
give rise to any significant impact.
Air Noise
by including future developments around the
Airport, as well as assessing the population
Further information has been included in the
'Air noise' generally refers to the noise
numbers within different contours under
First ES Addendum regarding the number of
produced by aircraft that are either airborne or
single modes of operation and with different
hourly departures and arrivals at the Airport,
on the runway during take-off or after landing.
aircraft mixes (for the two 'sensitivity tests'
and the corresponding hourly noise levels,
The impact of air noise has been assessed
referred to above). In addition, air noise
together with the calculation of 'single event
using noise contours which represent levels of
impacts have been considered in terms of
levels' of noise for both average and single
noise exposure radiating outwards from the
the 'perceptibility' and significance of
mode operations. This additional data
Airport, expressed as dB LAeq,T values. This
changes in air noise exposure around the
includes predictions of noise levels at a
measure is an index of aircraft noise exposure
Airport. In line with guidance provided in
selection of receptor locations, including
and refers to equivalent continuous sound
PPG 24 states that a change of 1 to 3 dB(A)
those identified in the ES and others
pressure level. It averages noise impacts and
is considered the minimum perceptible noise
requested by the Council in its first
the frequency of flights to present an overall
level under normal conditions.
Regulation 19 letter.
picture of airport noise over the day. A set of
further noise contours has been prepared
The assessment identified that with the
Taking the current situation, it can be seen
showing different modes of operation of the
Proposals, noise contours would increase in
that, in general terms, worst case hourly
Airport (all day westerly and easterly single
area by approximately 50%. The number of
ground noise levels are between 3 dB to 5
modes). The air noise modelling input data
residential dwellings within the 57 dB contour
dB higher than the average mode values. In
and assumptions have been clarified and the
would increase from approximately 3,300 in
the future however, little change is expected
noise contours representing the 'average
2006 to 6,600 (11,300 with proposed
in the worst hour values over now. This is
mode' have been reproduced on a faded
developments) in 2010. Dwelling numbers
because the worst case hourly throughput of
background for greater clarity.
within the 63 dB contour are predicted to
traffic is not expected to increase markedly
increase from approximately 100 80 to 700
over what occurs now, instead the overall
The assessment has been carried out
(or 3,100 with proposed developments). This
daily throughout will increase.
having regard to relevant national, regional
is the level that most airports start their noise
and local noise policies, particularly Planning
insulation schemes. Taking account of both
To mitigate these impacts, London City
Policy Guidance 24: Planning and Noise
existing and proposed developments around
Airport Limited will continue to implement its
(PPG 24). PPG24 defines four Noise
LCY, the number of residential dwellings
Sound Insulation Grant Scheme (SIGS) and
Exposure Categories (NEC) that range from
within the 57 dB and the 63 dB contours in
provide treatment to dwellings that fall within
A to D and indicate to what extent noise
2010 with the Proposals, as compared to
the 57 dB LAeq,16h noise contour, such that
should be considered in the granting of
without the Proposals, increases by around
internal noise levels are reduced by not less
planning permission for new residential
50%. No dwellings become exposed to noise
than 25 dB. The SIGS scheme will be further
developments. This guidance is equally
levels of 69 dB or more under the Proposals.
improved and consideration given to the
useful in assessing changes in the noise
The assessment concluded that overall, the
adoption of a two-tier scheme will be
environment on existing housing, as is the
increase in noise would be between 1 dB and
introduced, whereby residents most affected
case in this instance. A further assessment
just under 3 dB. The impact of this change is
by noise from the Airport would be offered
has been undertaken of the influence of air
considered to be minor, although a greater
sound insulation treatment of a higher
noise on three Opportunity Areas identified
number of people will fall within the 57 dB
performance to that currently offered.
in the London Plan as well as the three
LAeq,16h contour, the noise level regarded as
spatial options identified in the "Council's
the onset of significant community
Draft Core Strategy - Issues and Options
annoyance.
8
Non Technical Summary l April 2008
Ground Noise
Ground noise encompasses the noise
A detailed assessment of this noise source has
produced during the ground operations of
been undertaken, having given consideration
aircraft at the Airport, such as taxiing,
to PPG 24 guidance regarding daytime road
manoeuvring and running engines. Ground
traffic noise and using conventional noise
noise generation at the Airport is heard in
modelling techniques. In addition, road traffic
the context of off-airport ambient noise
noise has been predicted at a variety of
sources, such as road traffic, industrial
residential and other sensitive receptors and
Aircraft taxiing at London City Airport
activities and the DLR.
hourly road traffic data along Royal Albert
Way has also been included in the First ES
The proposed increase in aircraft movements
Addendum.
will have a corresponding increase in airside
activity on the ground. A detailed ground
No road alterations are required as part of the
noise assessment was therefore undertaken
Proposals and, therefore, it is considered that
to assess this effect. The modelling
any changes in road traffic noise would only
methodology for this assessment has been
occur as a result of changes to the vehicle
clarified in the First ES Addendum. In
flows along the existing local road network.
addition, 'worst hour' single mode noise data
predictions are provided for a range of
The assessment concluded that, given the
sensitive receptor locations.
relatively low levels of additional traffic likely to
be attracted to the road network as a result of
At present, residential dwellings surrounding
the Proposals (see Surface Transport and
the Airport are well protected from any
Access section above), the commensurate
significant effects of ground noise by a
increase in road traffic noise levels would be
barrier formed by the Airport terminal and
very small (less than 1 dB), which represents
pier structure as well as the DLR. Blast
a negligible impact. This has been reconfirmed
screens, recently erected between the
by the additional work referred to above.
western end of the pier and the Jet Centre,
also assists in reducing the effects of ground
Air Quality
noise on surrounding dwellings.
The Environmental Statement has
The noise assessment found that the
considered the potential air quality effects on
increase in ground operations of aircraft at the
the environment as a result of the proposed
Airport would result in slight increases in
increase in overall aircraft movements.
ground noise for most locations in close
These effects have also been considered
proximity to the Airport. The impact of these
having regard to relevant national, regional
changes is predicted to be negligible or minor
and local planning policies, in particular, the
at worst and, for residential dwellings, ground
Government's Air Quality Strategy (AQS)
noise levels will generally remain within
planning Policy Statement 23: Planning and
recommended noise criteria. As is the case
Pollution Control (PPS 23).
currently, ground noise levels along the
northern edge of the Royal Albert Dock will
London City Airport lies outside of, but
continue to be relatively high in view of its
adjacent to, an Air Quality Management Area
close proximity to the Airport and the absence
(AQMA) that has been designated by the
of any dedicated noise barriers. Noise levels
London Borough of Newham. Developments
at these locations will be acceptable both for
within AQMAs require particular attention to
existing dwellings and for future residential
be paid to any potential air quality impacts.
development, subject to suitable mitigation.
The assessment focused on two pollutants
Road Traffic Noise
with respect to potential human heath effects,
namely nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and fine
The Proposals will affect existing road traffic
particles (PM10), as these pollutants are of the
noise conditions on local roads as a result of a
greatest concern. Consideration was also
greater number of staff and passengers
given to the potential effects of odour nuisance.
travelling to and from the Airport, as well as a
general intensification of service vehicle traffic.
9
Non Technical Summary l April 2008
The assessment found that the Proposals
selected to be representative of locations
would increase oxides of nitrogen (NOx) and
where any air quality effects from road traffic
PM10 pollutant emissions by a small amount,
would be expected to be the greatest.
both from increased road traffic flows on the
The assessment found that predicted
local road network and due to a general
concentrations of both NO2 and PM10 would
intensification of airside operations. These
be below the National Air Quality Strategy
two sources are considered below:
objectives at all sensitive receptors. The air
quality impact is therefore predicted to be
Emissions from Airport Operations
very small, even at the 'worst-case' receptor
location.
Emissions of NOx and PM10 pollutants may
Air Quality Monitoring Equipment at London City
arise from a number of airport sources
However, in order to validate the above
Airport
including:
assumption regarding airport emissions, and
in response to the request from the Council,
· Aircraft on stand, taxiing to and from the
a detailed dispersion modelling exercise has
runway, and during takeoff and landing;
subsequently been undertaken to quantify
· Airside vehicle movements e.g. baggage
aircraft sources of emissions and further
handling and catering; and
assess the contribution of nitrogen oxides
· Stationary sources e.g. boiler plant
(NOx) and particulate matter (PM10) from
different airport sources. A number of
The potential impacts of airport sources are
additional receptor locations were included
related to the scale of operations defined in
in this exercise, at the request of the
terms of annual passenger throughput. The
Council.
Airport's operational capacity with the
proposals will remain below 5 mppa, the
The results of this additional work serve to
Nitrogen dioxide diffusion tube
figure set by the Government (DEFRA) as
confirm the original air quality assessment
being the point above which such direct
findings, demonstrating that the combined
airport emissions could have an adverse
impacts of road traffic and airport emissions
effect on local air quality and therefore need
will be very small, constituting a 'moderate
to be assessed in detail. Given that the
adverse' impact at the worst-case receptor
Airport's future operations will continue to fall
locations and 'negligible' impacts elsewhere.
below this threshold criterion the
Predicted incremental changes in nitrogen
Environmental Statement concluded that
dioxide are all less than 5% with the scheme
impacts associated with airport operations
in 2010 and generally less than 1%. For
would be insignificant.
PM10, all impacts are predicted to be
'negligible'.
Despite not crossing these thresholds, LCY
already constantly monitors air quality and
Having assessed this further information
reports these results quarterly to the London
alongside that contained in the original ES,
Borough of Newham.
the First ES Addendum demonstrateds that
the proposal would not result in
Emissions from Road Traffic
unacceptable impacts on local air quality.
The impacts of changed traffic flows on the
LCY constantly monitors air quality and
local road network, including Airport car parks,
reports these results quarterly to the London
were assessed using an advanced air quality
Borough of Newham. This monitoring
dispersion model widely used in the UK for
programme will continue into the future.
the assessment of road traffic impacts.
Odour Nuisance
With the Proposals, the predicted
concentrations of NO2 and PM10 will increase
Odours associated with airport operations
by a small amount due to the increased traffic
originate from incomplete combustion of the
flows on the local road network. Therefore,
kerosene fuels that are used in the gas turbine
the assessment considered the likely air
engines of aircraft. Such odours are generally
quality effects on 'sensitive receptors' (agreed
associated with the operation of aircraft idling at
with Environmental Health at London Borough
stands or taxiing to and from the runways
of Newham). These sensitive receptors were
where engines are operating at low power.
10
Non Technical Summary l April 2008
Airport odours present no health risk and are
direct jobs, 284 indirect jobs and 185
overestimate risk, and the corresponding
not generally considered offensive at low
induced jobs, which amounts to a total of
extent of the projected PSZs.
concentrations, but can become unpleasant as
1,970 full time equivalent (FTE) jobs. The
the exposure increases.
income generated from this employment was
By evaluating the difference between the
estimated as approximately £59.3m in the
existing and projected PSZs, it has been
The assessment of odour effects has
core study area.
concluded that the Application could have a
considered the complaints received by the
material effect on the future development
Airport management and the Council. London
In the event that the proposal was not
potential of a proportion of four 'allocated'
City Airport Limited investigates all complaints
agreed, Airport activity would support an
sites. However, it is important to note that
related to odour nuisance and, where possible,
additional 62 jobs over current levels.
none of these sites have planning
takes action to prevent future recurrence. The
Acceptance of the proposal would increase
permission or have been subject to planning
complaints records show that the management
this number by a further 957 jobs. In that
applications to bring forward such longer-
and response to odour nuisance has been
case, by 2010, the Airport would support
term development aspirations. These are
successful and very few substantiated
2277 direct jobs, 430 indirect jobs and 282
the Landmark Site, Thames Wharf, Dock
complaints are received each year. The
induced jobs - a total of 2989 FTE positions.
Road Industrial Site, and the Olympics
screens recently installed at the west end of the
The associated income has been estimated
Relocations site. LCY's consultants, York
Airport are designed to assist in the dispersal of
as £103.8m. Therefore, the employment and
Aviation, have estimated that, were these
both emissions and odour.
economic impact of the Proposals is
sites to be developed as indicated in the
considered to be substantial and beneficial.
Council's Planning Policy documents, 476
It is considered that the proposed increase in
At the request of the Council, further studies
'Full Time Equivalent' (FTE) jobs could
aircraft movements is unlikely to result in a
have been carried out to assess the possible
potentially be forgone or displaced as a
higher frequency of complaints received.
effects that the projected PSZs would have
result of the possible extension of the PSZs,
However, the First ES Addendum includes
on employment and income estimates.
equating to some £13m of Gross Value
further information on how an odour
Added (GVA) income. However, the
monitoring system will be trialled and, if
PSZs are areas at either end of an airport's
development aspirations for these sites
successful, be implemented at the Airport.
runway where certain restrictions are placed
would, in any case, be subject to detailed
on the development and use of the land. The
consideration through the planning process
Socio-economics
PSZs extend to an area where there is a
whereupon existing environmental, financial
notional 1 in 100,000 risk of fatality based on
or other constraints may lessen or alter their
The likely socio-economic effects of the
an individual residing in a particular location
development potential. In this regard, the
proposed increase in aircraft movements
24 hours a day, every day of the year. This
associated 'lost' jobs should be considered
were assessed as part of the EIA. A 'core
compares to the risk of an individual being
to be no more than theoretical at this stage
study area' was defined, comprised the
killed in a road accident of 1 in 16,800 and
and would also need to be offset against the
following local authorities - Barking and
someone being killed accidently in the home
displacement of existing employers
Dagenham, Bexley, Greenwich, Hackney,
is significantly higher at approximately 1 in
occupying the land (for which no data is
Havering, Lewisham, Newham, Redbridge,
13,000. Therefore, this risk is extremely
available at this time). In addition, it may
Southwark, Tower Hamlets, and Waltham
small, underlined by the fact that the
also be possible to rearrange the layout of
Forest. The core study area represents the
Government will allow any proposed
these sites, to maximize employment outside
area that could be expected to experience
developments within the PSZs, which
of the PSZs and to design compatible land
the greatest direct economic impact from the
already have planning permission, to be built
uses (car parking, storage and public open
Proposals.
without modification.
space etc.) within the PSZs.
The core study area has an average rate of
The new PSZs will be determined by the
unemployment of 3.8% compared with 3%
National Air Traffic Services (NATS) on
for London as a whole. In 2004, seven of
behalf of the Department for Transport only
the eleven local authorities within the area
after planning permission for the proposed
were listed within the top 50 most deprived
increase in flights has been granted.
districts in England. In addition, the study
However, LCY has commissioned
area (in 2005) had a lower percentage of
consultants to prepare the 'projected PSZs'
qualified people of working age in all areas
for the Interim Application. This modeling
(from NVQ Level 1 to 4) when compared
work used a best interpretation of the NATS
with London as a whole, and a higher
model, which applies data accumulated from
percentage of people with no qualifications
airports world-wide, and does not specifically
at all.
take account of the limitations placed on the
type of aircraft and procedures operating
In 2006, the Airport related employment in
from the relatively short runway at LCY.
the core study area was estimated at 1,501
Therefore, the model will tend to
Employment opportunities at London City Airport
11
Non Technical Summary l April 2008
Waste
Notwithstanding the above, the likely effects of
The ES assessed the likely environmental
the projected PSZs on employment values will
effects associated with additional waste
be more than offset by the economic and
generated from the proposed increase in
employment benefits of the Application.
aircraft movements at the Airport. These effects
Overall, it is projected that the net benefit of
have also been considered in the context of
LCYs proposed increase in flights would be 481
relevant national, regional and local planning
(FTE) jobs supporting a GVA income of £26m,
policies, in particular the Government's National
which remains a substantial and beneficial
Strategy for Waste (Waste Strategy 2007).
effect.
With the Proposals, total waste is estimated to
As well as the direct, indirect and induced
be approximately 1700 tonnes, which is an
employment benefits, economic benefits were
increase of 570 tonnes from the current wastes
also assessed in terms of the 'global
generated and approximately 530 more than
connectivity' that the Airport provides to the
the 2010 Base Case. Given that passenger
whole of London, and the way in which this
throughput at the Airport is forecast to increase
connectivity acts as a magnet for a wide range
from 2.38 mppa to 3.9 mppa by 2010, the
of economic and social activities. This effect is
overall amount of waste produced per
generally referred to as the 'catalytic impact' of
passenger is predicted to reduce to
an airport and it should be noted that the
0.436kg/passenger. The impact of this
projected PSZs will have no detrimental effect
additional waste generated by the Proposals is
on such catalytic benefits of the Application. It
considered to be negligible. Waste generated at
was concluded that that the growth of the
the Airport is to be managed within the context
Airport has particularly contributed to the
of the Waste Hierarchy. Existing reduction and
regeneration in the Docklands and the
recycling initiatives at the Airport (introduced in
establishment of the strong business and
2007) have already succeeded in significantly
financial services cluster at Canary Wharf, and
reducing the proportion of waste going to
that further growth will continue to support this
landfill. The Applicant will identify further ways
wider impact. This effect is also considered in
to reduce, re-use and recycle waste generated
detail in the Regeneration Statement, appended
through the preparation and implementation of
to the Environmental Statement.
a Waste Management Plan under the EMS to
be finalised in 2008.
In response to the request from the Council, a
comparative study of other Airport PSZs has
indicated that projected PSZs at the Airport are
unlikely to adversely affect house prices, or the
ability or cost to home owners to obtain
mortgages or insure their properties.
The ability of London City Airport to contribute
to wider economic development was also
evaluated by considering the implications of the
Airport not being able to expand to meet
increasing demands for travel as a result of
population and employment growth in the core
study area. This is measured in terms of the
additional journey time costs imposed on
displaced air travellers who would have to
access alternative airports. These potential
'journey time penalties' were calculated and it
was found that the cumulative annual journey
time penalties between 2008 and 2010 would
equate to a Net Present Value of £87m.
Recycling facilities at London City Airport
12
Non Technical Summary l April 2008
Summary of Mitigation and
Residual Effects
The Environmental Statement has identified the
It has been concluded that that the Proposal
existing and future mitigation and enhancement
would, in itself, be unlikely to preclude or inhibit
measures that London City Airport Limited, as
residential development in any part of the
the Applicant, proposes to implement in order to
Opportunity Areas or Spatial Options due to
address the environmental effects resulting
predicted increases in air noise. In 2010,
from the Application. The likely residual effects
the increase in air noise for the local
and the significance of such effects have also
community will be between 1 dB, a negligible
been determined.
amount, and just under 3 dB. The impact of
this increase will generally be minor.
Overall, the Proposals in the Application have
been demonstrated to have generally negligible
Further Information
or minor adverse environmental effects, which
can be largely controlled by the application of,
The full ES Environmental Statement, First
and where necessary improvement to, existing
and Second ES Addendums is available for
monitoring and management systems at the
inspection at the planning office of the
Airport. This should be considered relative to
London Borough of Newham. The address
the substantial beneficial effect the Proposals
of this office is:
will have in the local and wider economy of
Newham, Docklands, the City of London and
Development Control Service
elsewhere.
London Borough of Newham Council
Environmental Management Services
Cumulative Effects
Town Hall Annexe
330-354 Barking Road
An assessment has been undertaken of the
East Ham, London
likely cumulative effects of the Proposals with
E6 2RT
other permitted or allocated development
schemes on identified sensitive receptors
Additional copies of this Non-Technical
located within the vicinity of the Airport. It has
Summary can be obtained by writing to:
been concluded that, overall, the potential for
combined effects is low and that any such will
RPS
be negligible or minor adverse at worse. A full
1st Floor West, Cottons Centre
consideration of the potential impacts of the
Cottons Lane
proposals on the future regeneration of the
London
wider area is provided in the Regeneration
SE1 2QG
Statement appended to the Environmental
Statement.
Or by visiting: www.londoncityairport.com
Additional information is also included in the
Second ES Addendum which addresses the
potential noise effects of the Proposal on the
published regeneration aspirations in the areas
surrounding the Airport and further afield.
Three Opportunity Areas identified in the
London Plan (Consolidated with Amendments
since 2004) and three spatial options identified
in the Council's "Core Strategy - Issues and
Options" (February 2008) have been
considered.
13
