DOCSLIB.ORG

London City Airport in the London Borough of Newham Planning Application No

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
London City Airport in the London Borough of Newham Planning Application No planning report PDU/1962/03 9 September 2008 London City Airport in the London Borough of Newham planning application no. 07/01510/VAR Consultation Town & Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended). The proposal Application under Section 73 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to vary conditions 13 and 15 of the outline planning permission no. N/82/104 dated 23 May 1985, as previously varied by the Secretary of State on the 26 September 1991 and by Newham Council on 21 July 1998 and 11 July 2007, to allow up to 120,000 aircraft movements per annum with related modifications to other limits including noise factored movements. The applicant The applicant is London City Airport Limited. Strategic issues The substantive strategic issue considered in this report is the potential impact of the airport’s proposed expansion on the Thames Gateway Bridge project. Recommendation That the Mayor decides whether in light of the findings of the NATS study into the potential impact of the airports proposed expansion on the Thames Gateway Bridge, and the information set out in this report, he wishes to withdraw his outstanding objection to the expansion of City Airport as sought by the current planning application with Newham Council, and withdraw his request for the Secretary of State to call in the application and convene a public inquiry to consider the proposals. Background 1 On the 28 July 2008, the Mayor considered an officers report on the proposed expansion of City Airport (see Appendix 1 – Officers report dated 23 July 2008). His view was: • That he supports the expansion sought by London City Airport, but given its central location and the potential adverse impact any further expansion beyond that currently sought would be likely to generate, the airport may be reaching its natural desirable size, and any expansion beyond the 120,000 movement level could be extremely difficult to justify or support. page 1 • That as the current proposals would effectively blight a significant number of sites within the expanded public safety zones which are earmarked for regeneration, London City Airport should discuss this situation with the London Development Agency as a matter of urgency. • That as the public safety zones the current proposals would require might prejudice the town planning case for the Thames Gateway Bridge, that Newham Council defer it’s decision on the application until the results of a study commissioned by the Department for Transport from the National Air Traffic Services (NATS) into the risk aspects of the proposals were available and could be considered. 2 As a result, the Mayor wrote to Newham Council on the 30 July requesting that the Council defer its decision on the application until the results of the study were available and could be assessed, so that all parties involved could be assured that any expansion would not unacceptably impact on the proposed bridge (see Appendix 2 – Letter from the Mayor dated 30 July 2008). 3 On the 30 July 2008 the GLA’s Head of Planning Decisions also wrote to the Government Office for London withdrawing earlier Mayoral objections, and confirming the Mayor’s general support for the current proposals. He did though ask that the Secretary of State call in the application and convene a planning inquiry should Newham Council resolve to approve the application before the results of the NATS study could be fully considered, (see Appendix 3 – Letter from the Head of Planning Decisions dated 30 July 2008). 4 In the event, Newham Council’s Development Control Sub Committee agreed to the Mayor’s request and the application was deferred. The main concerns the Committee report identified are reproduced in Appendix 4 to this report (Extract from Newham Council’s 30 July 2008 Development Control Sub Committee report), and Newham Council officers have indicated that the application may be resubmitted to their Development Control Sub Committee on the 8 October 2008. 5 The NATS study was forwarded to Transport for London officers by the Department for Transport on the 21 August 2008, and this Mayoral planning report sets out the final views of Transport for London’s officers on its findings. This Mayoral planning report also updates the Mayor on discussions between City Airport and the London Development Agency, and on recent correspondence sent to the Mayor. LDA discussions with City Airport 6 The LDA has considerable landholdings adjacent to the airport and has recently appointed Faber Maunsell to carry out a review of the impact on its landholdings should City Airport expand as sought by the current planning application, and also as set out in its 2006 Masterplan (which envisages further increases to some 170,600 Air Transport Movements (of which 143,000 would be scheduled and the remainder corporate) by 2030.1 The study will also look at the implications of any expansion to 200,000 ATM a year as indicated by the airport when they met Transport for London officers on the 22 July 2008. The London City Airport operator has been invited to join a study steering group to contribute to these assessments. 7 Separate discussions have also taken place between LDA officers and the airport operator on the nature of any compensation package should adverse impact be demonstrated. 1 The current application envisages 120,000 Air Transport Movements a year. page 2 The NATS study 8 The NATS study (see Appendix 5 to this report –NATS Risk Assessment), uses an established methodology to assess the risk of death to individuals as a result of an aircraft related crash, so as to allow the Department for Transport to identify areas where risk to public safety is most concentrated in order for restrictions within those areas to be recommended and controlled.2 This analysis is then looked at comparatively to determine if established risk thresholds would be likely to be breached. 9 The report concludes that: “… whilst any increase in movements at City Airport will consequentially increase the risk exposure to potential users of the Thames Gateway Bridge, the overall risk exposure levels they would be subject to are below government guidelines for the tolerability of risk”.3 10 The Department for Transport - which is responsible for matters relating to public safety at airports, considered these findings and concluded that: “… it confirms the Department’s view that the presence of a section of the TGB in the outer zone would not be prejudicial to PSZ Policy. The risk levels that any potential use of the bridge would be exposed to falls within the 1 in 100,000 risk threshold of this policy”.4 11 TfL officers considered these findings, and as set out below, have concluded that the identified risk is tolerable, and that the objection can therefore be withdrawn without prejudicing the case for the bridge. Mayoral correspondence 12 Subsequent to the Mayor writing to Newham Council on the 30 July 2008, a number of E-mails and letters have been sent to the Mayor, most expressing concern about or opposition to the proposed expansion and the Mayor’s expressed views. The main issues raised include noise, air quality, quality of life, the failure of the airport to fully comply with the terms of its S106 legal agreement with the London Borough of Newham, and potential impact on regeneration. 13 This correspondence has been considered and responded to by officers who are of the view that the matters raised would not require the Mayor to reconsider his previous decision, and remain of the view that relevant noise issues can be reasonably assessed and resolved at a borough level by the relevant local planning authorities, rather than at a strategic or Londonwide level. 2 NATS Study page 3, paragraph 2. 3 NATS Study, pages 3 and 16. 4 Letter from the Department of Transport to Transport for London dated 21 August 2008 – see Appendix 5. page 3 Comments of Transport for London 12 TfL previously raised concern in relation to the potential conflict of the Thames Gateway Bridge (TGB) proposals with the Public Safety Zone (PSZs) resulting from increased aircraft movements at London City Airport. The NATS study recently submitted by DfT is therefore welcomed to address TfL’s outstanding issue. Following consideration of the report, it is accepted that the risk of 1 in 100,000 is tolerable and as a result, TfL is now satisfied that the presence of a section of the TGB in the outer zone would not be prejudiced to PSZ policy. TfL has therefore no more objections to make on the application. Comments of the London Development Agency 14 The London Development Agency has significant landowner interests relating to the proposals and in accordance with established practice, has not therefore been consulted on this report. Local planning authority’s position 15 The application was deferred by Newham Council on the 30 July 2008 at the request of the Mayor, and is likely to be reported to its Development Control Sub Committee on the 8 October 2008. Legal issues 16 The application has been made pursuant to Section 73 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to vary a condition attached to an earlier permission relating to the number of flights that are allowed from City Airport each year. The referability of the application has been considered and it has been concluded that the application is not referable under the provisions of the Mayor of London Orders 2000 or 2008. 17 The Mayor has however been consulted on the application and may make comments to the planning authority that must then be taken into consideration when a decision is made on the application.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Tfl RIVER CROSSINGS CONSULTATION EXERCISE and the REDBRIDGE RESPONSE: BRIEFING PAPER
    TfL RIVER CROSSINGS CONSULTATION EXERCISE AND THE REDBRIDGE RESPONSE: BRIEFING PAPER 1. Overview Building upon previous consultations, Transport for London is presently undertaking a public consultation exercise seeking views upon a revised set of options for new crossings of the River Thames east of Silvertown. (A proposed new tunnel under the Thames linking Silvertown with the North Greenwich peninsular has already attracted support and will be the subject of separate consultation later this year). The four options upon which views are now sought comprise: A new modern ferry at Woolwich A ferry service at Gallions Reach A bridge at Gallions Reach A bridge at Belvedere. The location of these options is shown in Appendix A in a separate document accompanying this one. For each separate proposal, views are invited whether respondents Strongly Support/Support/Neither/ Oppose/ Strongly Oppose. The public consultation deadline is 12th September, but Boroughs have been given until 30th September to respond. The purpose of this paper is to draw attention to this consultation, summarise broadly the features of the emerging options and to seek a steer on the stance to be followed in LB Redbridge’s formal reply. 2. Background It is important to be aware of previous formal LB Redbridge positions conveyed to TfL in respect of new river crossings proposals. Those stances are summarised in Appendix B to this paper. The salient context surrounding the options now being considered is summarised below: TfL consultation in recent years has yielded support from a majority of respondents to provision of new Thames crossings, with businesses in east and south-east London very supportive.
    [Show full text]
  • London City Airport Master Plan 2006
    Master Plan November 2006 Master Plan November 2006 At a more local level, the Airport is a force restrictions we impose will continue. Foreword for regeneration which has not only created Alongside this the opening of the extension jobs and prosperity in the immediate area, of the DLR to the Airport in December but has also helped to spearhead the 2005 means we now have significantly success of landmarks like Canary Wharf improved public transport links with a and ExCel London and drive recent and higher proportion of passengers (49%) future extensions to the Docklands Light accessing the Airport by rail than any other Railway (DLR). UK airport. These links will be strengthened further by the operation of Crossrail in the We are also very well placed to continue future, and LCA is a key supporter of this to drive the economic prosperity flowing project. from the London Olympic and Paralympic Games in 2012. Through co-operating with a wide variety of interested bodies, we will seek to further But to do all this, we need to grow. In improve our already good environmental 2003 the Government published its Aviation record concentrating on reducing our White Paper which required all UK airports contribution to climate change and man- to set out master plans to grow through to aging all emissions, particularly waste. In 2030 to meet the increase in passenger addition, we support the aviation industry’s demand. One of the key objectives of this inclusion in the EU Emissions Trading paper was to maximise the use of existing Scheme, which will allow the issue of runways and infrastructure to delay, aviation greenhouse gas emissions to be reduce and in some cases eliminate the effectively and responsibly addressed.
    [Show full text]
  • Camilla Ween Lessons from London
    Camilla Ween Lessons from London Harvard Loeb Fellow February 2008 1 Developing a World City 2 Better integration of the River Thames 3 Planning for growth 4 Balancing new and old 5 2000 London changed! Greater London Authority Mayor Ken Livingstone 6 Greater London Authority: • Mayor’s Office • Transport for London • London Development Agency • Fire and Emergency Planning • Metropolitan Police 7 What helped change London • Greater London Authority established in 2000 • Spatial Development Strategy - London Plan • Transport for London • Congestion Charge Scheme • Major transport schemes • Role of Land Use Planning • Sustainable travel and ‘soft’ measures 8 Spatial Development Strategy 9 London Plan A coherent set of policies • Climate Change Action Plan • Waste • Noise • Biodiversity • Children’s play space • Flood • Access etc etc 10 11 Transport for London • Overground rail • Underground • Buses • Trams • Taxis • River Services • Cycling • Walking 12 Transport for London • Budget ca $15 Bn • Carries 3 billion passengers pa 13 Transport for London Steady increase in journeys (2007): • Bus up 3.6% • Underground up 4.5% • Docklands Light Rail 16% 14 Transport Strategy 15 Congestion Charge Scheme • First zone introduced 2003 • Area doubled 2007 16 16 Congestion Charging 17 17 Congestion Charge Scheme • Number-plate recognition • Central call-centre billing • Many options for paying: - Buy on the day - Text messaging - Internet 18 Congestion Charging • $16 per day (multiple re-entry) • 7.00 am to 6.00 pm • Monday to Friday • Weekends free 19 Congestion Charging Benefits: • 21 % Traffic reduction • 30% Congestion reduction in first year • 43 % increase in cycling within zone • Reduction in Accidents • Reduction in key traffic pollutants • $250m raised for improving transport 20 Congestion Charging • Public transport accommodating displaced car users • Retail footfall higher than rest of UK • No effect on property prices 21 Major Transport Schemes Being developed: • Crossrail • New tram systems • Major interchanges - e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • What Light Rail Can Do for Cities
    WHAT LIGHT RAIL CAN DO FOR CITIES A Review of the Evidence Final Report: Appendices January 2005 Prepared for: Prepared by: Steer Davies Gleave 28-32 Upper Ground London SE1 9PD [t] +44 (0)20 7919 8500 [i] www.steerdaviesgleave.com Passenger Transport Executive Group Wellington House 40-50 Wellington Street Leeds LS1 2DE What Light Rail Can Do For Cities: A Review of the Evidence Contents Page APPENDICES A Operation and Use of Light Rail Schemes in the UK B Overseas Experience C People Interviewed During the Study D Full Bibliography P:\projects\5700s\5748\Outputs\Reports\Final\What Light Rail Can Do for Cities - Appendices _ 01-05.doc Appendix What Light Rail Can Do For Cities: A Review Of The Evidence P:\projects\5700s\5748\Outputs\Reports\Final\What Light Rail Can Do for Cities - Appendices _ 01-05.doc Appendix What Light Rail Can Do For Cities: A Review of the Evidence APPENDIX A Operation and Use of Light Rail Schemes in the UK P:\projects\5700s\5748\Outputs\Reports\Final\What Light Rail Can Do for Cities - Appendices _ 01-05.doc Appendix What Light Rail Can Do For Cities: A Review Of The Evidence A1. TYNE & WEAR METRO A1.1 The Tyne and Wear Metro was the first modern light rail scheme opened in the UK, coming into service between 1980 and 1984. At a cost of £284 million, the scheme comprised the connection of former suburban rail alignments with new railway construction in tunnel under central Newcastle and over the Tyne. Further extensions to the system were opened to Newcastle Airport in 1991 and to Sunderland, sharing 14 km of existing Network Rail track, in March 2002.
    [Show full text]
  • Relationship Between Transport and Development in the Thames Gateway
    Relationship between transport and development in the Thames Gateway Contents Front cover......................................................................................................................2 Strategic overview and summary..................................................................................3 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................8 2. The scope of the Thames Gateway in 2003 ............................................................11 3. Transport analysis....................................................................................................30 4. Potential scale of development ................................................................................34 5. Transport and development interaction ................................................................48 6. Strategic focus in the Thames Gateway .................................................................62 7. Phasing of transport and development...................................................................66 8. Conclusions ...............................................................................................................69 9. Appendix A: Travel characteristics and capacities...............................................72 10. Appendix B: Planning aspiration forecasts for SE sub areas ............................86 11. Appendix C: Examples from the Netherlands.....................................................89 12. Appendix
    [Show full text]
  • The Thames Gateway – Where Next?
    Gateway_Cover.qxd:Smith Institute 28/10/09 13:26 Page 1 the thames gateway – where next? The Smith Institute The Smith Institute, founded in the memory of the late Rt Hon John Smith, is an independent think tank that undertakes research, education and events. Our charitable purpose is educational in regard to the UK economy in its widest sense. We provide a platform for national and international discussion on a wide range of public policy issues concerning social justice, community, governance, enterprise, economy, trade, and the environment. the thames gateway – where next? the thames gateway – where If you would like to know more about the Smith Institute please write to: Edited by Sir Terry Farrell The Smith Institute 4th Floor 30-32 Southampton Street London WC2E 7RA Telephone +44 (0)20 7823 4240 Fax +44 (0)20 7836 9192 Email [email protected] Website www.smith-institute.org.uk Registered Charity No. 1062967 2009 Designed and produced by Owen & Owen Gateway_Text.qxd:Smith 29/10/09 09:19 Page 1 THE SMITH INSTITUTE the thames gateway – where next? The Thames Gateway is the largest and most significant growth and regeneration site in the UK. Although the pace of development has slowed since the credit crunch and the economic downturn hit, the Gateway remains a significant driver for sustainable growth and innovation in London and the Greater South East. Making the most of the Gateway will, moreover, continue to be a feature in the planning of the region for many years to come. The aim of this monograph is not to give a justification for the Gateway or to detail every project.
    [Show full text]
  • Written Guide
    Trains and boats and planes A self guided walk around the riverside and docks at North Woolwich Discover how a remote marsh became a gateway to the world Find out how waterways have influenced economic boom, decline and revival See how various transport networks have helped to transform the area Explore a landscape rapidly evolving through regeneration .discoveringbritain www .org ies of our land the stor scapes throug discovered h walks 2 Contents Introduction 4 Route overview 5 Practical information 6 Detailed route maps 8 Commentary 10 Further information 33 Credits 34 © The Royal Geographical Society with the Institute of British Geographers, London, 2014 Discovering Britain is a project of the Royal Geographical Society (with IBG) The digital and print maps used for Discovering Britain are licensed to the RGS-IBG from Ordnance Survey Cover image: University of East London campus buildings © Rory Walsh 3 Trains and boats and planes Explore the changing riverside and docks at North Woolwich For centuries the part of East London now known as North Woolwich was a remote marsh by the River Thames. Then from the 1840s it became a gateway to the world. Three new docks - Royal Victoria, Royal Albert and King George V - and the trades that grew around them transformed this area into the industrial heart of the world’s largest port. A busy day in King George V Dock (1965) But this success was not to last. © PLA / Museum of London When the docks closed in 1981 North Woolwich was left isolated and in decline. So a series of projects were established to revive the area, complete with new buildings and transport networks.
    [Show full text]
  • East London River Crossings: Assessment of Options
    TRANSPORT FOR LONDON RIVER CROSSINGS: SILVERTOWN TUNNEL SUPPORTING TECHNICAL DOCUMENTATION This report is part of a wider EAST LONDON RIVER suite of documents which CROSSINGS: outline our approach to traffic, environmental, optioneering ASSESSMENT OF OPTIONS and engineering disciplines, amongst others. We would Transport for London like to know if you have any December 2012 comments on our approach to this work. To give us your This report focuses on the proposals for views, please respond to our river crossings, namely the progression consultation at of new crossing infrastructure for road www.tfl.gov.uk/silvertown- traffic between east and south east tunnel London, in the form of fixed links (bridges or tunnels), or vehicle ferries. Please note that consultation on the Silvertown Tunnel is running from October – December 2014 East London River Crossings: Assessment of Options Date: December 2012 1 TfL Planning River crossings: Assessment of options Review of River Crossings: report series A. Assessment of need B. Assessment of options this report 2 TfL Planning River crossings: Assessment of options CONTENTS 1. Strategic context ............................................................................................................. 4 2. Assessing river crossing options ..................................................................................... 9 3. Do nothing (Option A) .................................................................................................... 16 4. Demand management and maximising public transport
    [Show full text]
  • Outline Business Case
    TRANSPORT FOR LONDON RIVER CROSSINGS: SILVERTOWN TUNNEL SUPPORTING TECHNICAL DOCUMENTATION This report is part of a wider OUTLINE BUSINESS CASE suite of documents which outline our approach to traffic, Jacobs / Transport for London environmental, optioneering October 2014 and engineering disciplines, The Silvertown Tunnel Outline Business amongst others. We would Case has been prepared in accordance like to know if you have any with transport scheme business case comments on our approach to guidance published by the Department this work. To give us your for Transport. It sets out the evidence views, please respond to our for intervening in the transport system to consultation at address the issues of congestion and www.tfl.gov.uk/silvertown- road network resilience at the Blackwall tunnel Tunnel. It looks at the alternative options considered and why a new bored tunnel at Silvertown, with traffic demand Please note that consultation managed by a user charge, provides the on the Silvertown Tunnel is best solution. The economics of running from October – providing the new tunnel are appraised December 2014. along with outline details of how TfL will finance, procure and manage the project. TRANSPORT FOR LONDON This report (or note) forms part of a suite of documents that support the public consultation for Silvertown Tunnel in Autumn 2014. This document should be read in conjunction with other documents in the suite that provide evidential inputs and/or rely on outputs or findings. The suite of documents with brief descriptions is listed below:- Silvertown Crossing Assessment of Needs and Options This report sets out in detail, the need for a new river crossing at Silvertown, examines and assesses eight possible crossing options and identifies the preferred option.
    [Show full text]
  • GO EAST: UNLOCKING the POTENTIAL of the THAMES ESTUARY Andrew Adonis, Ben Rogers and Sam Sims
    GO EAST: UNLOCKING THE POTENTIAL OF THE THAMES ESTUARY Andrew Adonis, Ben Rogers and Sam Sims Published by Centre for London, February 2014 Open Access. Some rights reserved. Centre for London is a politically independent, As the publisher of this work, Centre for London wants to encourage the not-for-profit think tank focused on the big challenges circulation of our work as widely as possible while retaining the copyright. facing London. It aims to help London build on its We therefore have an open access policy which enables anyone to access our content online without charge. Anyone can download, save, perform long history as a centre of economic, social, and or distribute this work in any format, including translation, without written intellectual innovation and exchange, and create a permission. This is subject to the terms of the Centre for London licence. fairer, more inclusive and sustainable city. Its interests Its main conditions are: range across economic, environmental, governmental and social issues. · Centre for London and the author(s) are credited Through its research and events, the Centre acts · This summary and the address www.centreforlondon.co.uk are displayed · The text is not altered and is used in full as a critical friend to London’s leaders and policymakers, · The work is not resold promotes a wider understanding of the challenges · A copy of the work or link to its use online is sent to Centre for London. facing London, and develops long-term, rigorous and You are welcome to ask for permission to use this work for purposes other radical solutions for the capital.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 5: LIP Proposals
    Chapter 5: LIP Proposals Contents Page Number Introduction 121 Part One – Addressing the Policies and Proposals in the 123 Mayor’s Transport Strategy Road Maintenance 123 Principal Roads Maintenance 123 Non-Principal Roads Maintenance 124 Bridge Assessment and Strengthening 124 Local Safety Schemes 125 20 MPH Zones 126 Education, Training and Publicity Schemes 127 Walking 127 Cycling 130 London Cycle Network (LCN) + 132 Non-LCN + Network 132 Cycle Parking and Cyclist Training 132 Traffic Signals 133 Buses 133 Bus Stop Accessibility 133 Bus Priority 134 Enforcement and Management of Bus Routes 135 London Bus Priority Network (LBPN) 135 ‘A’ Roads and Busy Bus Routes and Parallel Initiatives 136 Bus Network 137 Operation of Bus Services in the Borough 137 Bus Network Development 138 Area Based Schemes 140 Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 117 Town Centres 140 Streets for People 142 Station Access 143 School Travel Plans – Safe Routes to School 146 Workplace Travel Plans 146 Travel Awareness 147 Freight 149 Regeneration Area Schemes 150 Environment 151 Air Quality Improvement 152 Ambient Noise reduction 152 Controlled Parking Zones (CPZs) 152 Accessibility 153 Community Transport, Door-to-Door Transport Services, 154 Taxis, Private Hire Vehicles Monitoring 155 A13 Route Management Study 156 Airports 156 Biodiversity 156 Car Clubs 157 Consultation 157 East London Transit 157 Freight Interchange and Distribution 157 Land-Use Policies and Planning 158 London Traffic Control Centre 158 Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 118 2012 Olympic Games and Other Events 158
    [Show full text]
  • Thames Gateway Bridge Value of Time Study Modelling Report
    Thames Gateway Bridge Value of Time Study Modelling report ARUNA SIVAKUMAR CHARISMA CHOUDHURY CHARLENE ROHR DRR-xxxxxx-YYY (document number) 19 February 2009 Prepared for Transport for London Preface The Thames Gateway Bridge (TGB) is a new proposed road bridge connecting Beckton to Thamesmead in East London 1. This bridge is intended to deliver savings in journey times for those wishing to cross the Thames in this area, but those driving over the bridge would be charged a toll. The Thames Gateway Bridge is also a key component of the regeneration plans for the area. Application for the TGB scheme went to public inquiry from June 2005 to May 2006. Following this inquiry, Transport for London engaged Halcrow to undertake further work to quantify and evaluate the impact of the proposed bridge. A key input into any transport model is “values of time” (VOTs), which are a quantification of how travellers trade off changes in journey time and cost. For the purposes of previous modelling of the impact of the Thames Gateway Bridge VOT values from WebTAG, the UK Department for Transport’s transport analysis guidance document were used. As a result of the public inquiry, further evidence on local values was required. RAND Europe, in collaboration with Accent, were therefore commissioned to collect new local evidence on travellers’ willingness to pay for time savings. The timescale for the study was very tight, with commencement of the study in December 2007, and results required for the end of March 2008. This timescale limited the number of model specifications that could be tested and further analysis will be proposed to TfL.
    [Show full text]