planning report PDU/3089/01 16 January 2013 Saga Ruby, Royal Albert Dock in the Borough of Newham planning application no. 12/01956/FUL

Strategic planning application stage 1 referral (new powers) Town & Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended); Greater London Authority Acts 1999 and 2007; Town & Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008

The proposal Berthing of the former ocean going cruise liner Saga Ruby in Royal Albert Dock for use as hotel and timeshare accommodation and a new entertainment venue open to the general public. The applicant The applicant is Frank W Chapman and partners and the architect is Rural Office for Architecture.

Strategic issues Further discussion is needed before it can be said that the proposal to berth this boat in Royal Albert Dock complies with London Plan policy. There are concerns relating to impact on the sites on the dockside and on the impact on rowing in the dock itself. Further information, discussions or commitments are needed on blue ribbon network, urban design, flood risk, biodiversity, climate change and transport.

Recommendation

That Newham Council be advised that further discussion is needed before it can be said that the proposal complies with London Plan policy for the reasons set out in paragraph 59 of this report.

Context

1 On 11 December 2012 the Mayor of London received documents from Newham Council notifying him of a planning application of potential strategic importance to develop the above site for the above uses. Under the provisions of The Town & Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008 the Mayor has until 21 January 2013 to provide the Council with a statement setting out whether he considers that the application complies with the London Plan, and his reasons for taking that view. The Mayor may also provide other comments. This report sets out information for the Mayor’s use in deciding what decision to make.

2 The application is referable under Category 1A and 1c of the Schedule to the Order 2008:

1A: Development (other than development which only comprises the provision of houses, flats, or houses and flats) which comprises or includes the erection of a building or buildings outside central London and with a floorspace of more than 15,000 sq.m.

page 1 1C: Development which comprises or includes the erection of a building that is more than 30 metres high and is outside the City of London.

3 Once Newham Council has resolved to determine the application, it is required to refer it back to the Mayor for his decision as to whether to direct refusal; take it over for his own determination; or allow the Council to determine it itself.

4 The Mayor of London’s statement on this case will be made available on the GLA website www.london.gov.uk. Due to the GLA land interests in the site, the Mayor has not been involved with the negotiations from a land perspective in order to protect his planning function. Site description

5 It is proposed to berth the ship in the Royal Albert Dock and provide associated uses on the adjacent dockside site, which is owned by the GLA. The GLA has granted The Royal Docks Management Association (RODMA) a long leasehold over the water rights in the dock and the GLA retains the freehold. Newham Council offices lie to the east of the site with the GLA owned ‘Royal Albert Dock site’ beyond. A recently built hotel is situated close to the site on Dockside Road, there is an extant consent for a further hotel to the north-west of the application site and to the north of the site a planning application has been submitted for three hotels which was recently reported to the Mayor (PDU/2772b/01). ExCel and London City Airport are respectively 800m and 1 km away. The Regatta Rowing Centre lies to the west of the site. The site currently has launching pontoons on it for the Rowing Centre

6 The nearest road to the site is Dockside Road, a private road, which connects to the Strategic Road Network (SRN) the A1020 Royal Albert Way at Royal Albert Roundabout and Connaught Roundabout, approximately 200m away. The nearest sections of the Transport for London Road Network (TLRN) are over 2km away. The DLR infrastructure runs through the dockside site and Royal Albert Docklands Light Railway (DLR) station is 150m from the site, whilst stops for 2 bus routes are 400m away. As such, it has been demonstrated that the site has a poor PTAL (public transport accessibility level) of 2, on a scale of 1 to 6 where 6 is considered as excellent.

Details of the proposal

7 The proposal is to berth a classic ocean cruise liner in the Royal Albert Dock to offer high quality hotel and timeshare accommodation and associated facilities to both staying guests and the general public. The ship will operate as a cruise liner with officers and crew. The applicant sets out that the ship will be able to accommodate west end style shows, cabaret, film premieres, weddings and corporate functions and will be able to be used as a location for the filming of television and film productions. The ship provides 16,410 sq.m. of accommodation and facilities for guests and staff. Of this area 14,270 sq.m. is used for the hotel and facilities and 2,140 sq.m. for staff accommodation.

8 The Saga Ruby was the last to be built in Britain. She was commissioned by the Norwegian American Line and was launched on 15 May 1972. In October 1983 she joined the Cunard fleet and in November 2004 she was sold to . After a refit she was in use until 2010.

9 The following facilities will be provided:

 377 passenger cabins (including 33 single rooms)

page 2  Restaurant with more than 600 seats.

 Show lounge seating 500 and a further lounge seating 250.

 A ‘view’ restaurant with 60 covers.

 Bars and poolside cafe

 Boutique cinema and theatre seating 200

 Library

 Spa

 Retail facilities

10 Between the two existing lawns on the dockside a landscaped taxi and parking area is proposed, which will be screened by hedges and trees. The area will provide taxi drop off and waiting for up to 14 taxis together with 12 motorcycle spaces, 28 parking spaces and three disabled parking spaces. Further guest parking will be provided in the ExCel centre and by out-of- hours use of parking adjacent to Newham’s offices.

11 Three landscaped pavilions are proposed at key points in the landscape. These will all have a common form but will serve different functions. One will be a gatehouse and will act as a reception as well as accommodating incoming electrical services and providing a shelter for 20 cycles. The second will act as a taxi and minibus pick-up and drop-off area. The third provides a covered walkway between the pedestrian avenue and the entrance gangway to the ship.

12 Four access structures connect the ship to the dockside: a main entrance facility with lift and stair; two escape stair towers; and a service entrance for loading purposes. All the structures will be attached to the ship and located between the ship and the quay using a hinged platform to allow for movement.

13 The ship will be supplied with water, electricity and data from on-shore and waste water will be connected to the on-shore sewerage system. Case history

14 There is no strategic case history. Strategic planning issues and relevant policies and guidance

15 The relevant issues and corresponding policies are as follows:

 Economic development London Plan; the Mayor’s Economic Development Strategy; Employment Action Plan  World city role London Plan  Urban design London Plan;  Transport London Plan; the Mayor’s Transport Strategy;  Crossrail London Plan; Mayoral Community Infrastructure Levy;  Parking London Plan; the Mayor’s Transport Strategy  Retail/town centre uses London Plan  Employment London Plan;

page 3  Access London Plan; Accessible London: achieving an inclusive environment SPG; Planning and Access for Disabled People: a good practice guide (ODPM)  Sustainable development London Plan; Sustainable Design and Construction SPG; Mayor’s Climate Change Adaptation Strategy; Mayor’s Climate Change Mitigation and Energy Strategy; Mayor’s Water Strategy  Tourism/leisure London Plan; Good Practice Guide on Planning for Tourism (DCLG)  Blue Ribbon Network London Plan

16 For the purposes of Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, the development plan in force for the area is the 2012 Newham Core Strategy, the 2001 Newham Unitary Development Plan (saved policies) and the 2011 London Plan.

17 The following are also relevant material considerations:  The National Planning Policy Framework and Technical Guide to the National Planning Policy Framework  The draft Revised Early Minor Alteration to the London Plan

Land use principle

18 London Plan Policy 4.5 recognises the need for 40,000 net additional hotel bedrooms by 2031. It seeks to ensure that new hotels are in appropriate locations and states that beyond the Central Activities Zone hotels should be focussed in town centres where there is good public transport access to central London and opportunity and intensification areas.

19 This site is within the Royal Docks Opportunity Area, the London Plan seeks to deliver 6,000 new jobs and to capitalise on the success of ExCel and its potential as a focus for further visitor/business related growth. Therefore the principle of further hotel capacity in the area is acceptable. The applicant should set out how many of the cabins it proposed to be time-share accommodation.

20 The applicant sets out that the proposal will initially create 153 full time equivalent posts rising to 228 posts over three years as the business develops. Of these 50 senior positions will be filled by experienced maritime personnel, with the remainder of the posts recruited from the general community. It is anticipated that further posts will be created in servicing the entertainment and special events programme the ship will provide. Around 17 full time equivalent posts will support the nightly entertainment programme. The creation of these jobs is welcomed.

21 The applicant sets out that some rooms will be available for use by the community at no cost and in addition the major entertainment venues could be available to local drama and dance groups, for practice and performance, when they are not in use for the nightly entertainment programme. The applicant also proposes to make links with local water based organisations and offer the expertise of its experienced seafarers to them as well as make available some of the ship’s boats for use. These need to be formalised in a community access plan.

22 London Plan policy 7.30 sets out that development within or alongside London’s docks should protect and promote the vitality, attractiveness and historical interest of London’s remaining docks areas. It sets out that partial infilling of the dock should be prevented however paragraph 7.84 sets out that permanently moored vessels can add to the diversity and vibrancy of

page 4 waterways and London in general. As such the berthing of a in this location could be acceptable subject to impact on navigation, hydrology and biodiversity of the water. The views of the Environment Agency and the Canal and River Trust should be sought on these matters.

23 Policy 7.27 also promotes access to and along the waterways and their use. The application should demonstrate that the proposals are overall beneficial in these terms, in particular as the Regatta Centre pontoons are to be relocated.

24 London Plan policy 3.16 sets out that proposals which would result in a loss of social infrastructure in areas of defined need for that type of social infrastructure without realistic proposals for re-provision should be resisted. London Plan policy 3.19 sets out that proposals that result in a net loss of sports and recreation facilities, should be resisted. The site currently contains pontoons which are used by the Rowing Centre and it is proposed to relocate these further to the west. In addition the Regatta Centre currently use the entire length and width of the dock, as such the siting of the boat will impact on this activity. Further discussion is needed on the impact on the activities of the rowing club.

25 The dock is a Site of Importance for Nature Conservation. London Plan policy indicates that such sites should be given protection commensurate with their importance. As it is a borough site its value should be considered in a borough context. London Plan policy also sets out that if development is permitted the following hierarchy should apply: avoid adverse impact to the biodiversity interest: minimize impact and seek mitigation; only in exceptional cases where the benefits of the proposal clearly outweigh the biodiversity impacts, seek appropriate compensation.

26 Although this is a Borough site and therefore the value of the site should be considered in a Borough context it is part of a London-wide network of sites of importance for nature conservation. The conservation of the features (e.g. ecological connections) and assets (i.e. sum total of habitats and species populations) is important in order to conserve London’s biodiversity. Consequently, whilst loss of part of a Borough site per se is not of strategic importance, the impact of connections or depreciation of the overall asset may need to be addressed strategically. Further details are needed of the species on-site in order to properly assess impact.

27 The proposed development would not be able to avoid impact because of the footprint of the proposed facility. The applicant sets out that the gap between the ship and the dockside will be a sheltered strip and may be partially occupied by such biodiversity enhancing measures as fish spawning media or other features that benefit from the shelter offered by the ship. The applicant should confirm the measures proposed and discuss these with the Environment Agency and the Canal and River Trust. The Council should make a decision as to whether this mitigation is appropriate.

28 As such whilst hotel use in this area is in line with London Plan policy the impact on rowing in the dock needs further discussion before it can be said that the land use principle is acceptable. Further discussion is also needed on the ecological impact of the proposal. There is also concern that the berthing of the ship in this location results in sub-optimal use of the adjacent dockside sites and further discussion is needed of the impact of this proposal on future development.

Urban design

29 There are no strategic design issues which arise regarding the ship itself however, there is concern over the impact its location will have on the future development of the sites in the vicinity in terms of overshadowing as stated above.

page 5 30 In addition there is concern that the ship’s appearance will deteriorate over time, for example by rusting or the paint peeling, given its static berthing. The applicant should submit a maintenance statement to give assurance that the ship will not become an eyesore over time. Flood risk

31 The Flood Risk Assessment states that the car park will utilise sustainable drainage and/or permeable surfacing. This approach complies with the London Plan sustainable drainage hierarchy contained within policy 5.13 of the London Plan, and should be secured via an appropriate planning condition.

32 No discharge of surface water should be allowed to the combined sewer system as any discharge should be directed to the Dock via any necessary pollution control measures. The applicant should clarify that this is its intention. Climate change mitigation

33 A ship is to be used for the development, it will not be subject to building based sustainability assessment (e.g. BREEAM). However the applicant has set out the measures that will be taken to achieve reductions in total carbon dioxide emissions. This is noted and welcomed.

34 It should be noted that as of 1 January 2013 the International Maritime Organisation (the United Nations specialized agency with responsibility for the safety and security of shipping and the prevention of marine pollution by ships) requires all ships over 400 gross tonnes to have a ship energy efficiency management plan (SEEMP). This ship is 24,293 gross tonnes.

35 In the UK SEEMPs will be administered and consulted upon by Lloyds of Register of Shipping. The applicant has committed to having a SEEMP to identify and implement measures to reduce energy use. The projected energy savings should be expressed in terms of total carbon dioxide emissions.

36 With particular reference to London Plan Policy 5.6 the ship will be modified so that it could accept connection to a future district heating and/or cooling network. This is noted and welcomed.

37 The Council should consider conditioning ongoing measurement of carbon dioxide emissions against an agreed baseline to demonstrate reductions equivalent to a land based development. Public safety

38 The site is just outside the Public Safety Zone for London City Airport. The applicant sets out that, following negotiations with London City Airport, a safeguarding assessment was undertaken in February 2012 to establish whether mooring the cruise liner in Royal Albert Dock would present a restriction on flight procedures. The ship referred to in the report is not the Saga Ruby but it has similar characteristics. The report found that the liner would not introduce any additional restrictions on light procedures or on instrument approach procedures at the airport. Transport

Trip Generation and Highway Impact 39 TfL accepts that this development is unlikely to have a significant highway impact. The transport assessment (TA) assesses traffic generation only. TfL requests that public transport trip

page 6 generation is also provided, in particular for DLR by direction for both the AM and PM peak periods. The applicant should also assess the public transport impacts at the peak arrival and departure times of the non residents using the onboard theatre, cinema and restaurant.

Vehicular Access and Parking 40 31 car parking spaces are proposed, including 3 Blue Badge spaces and a further 3 spaces capable of future adaptation. This represents a ratio of 0.08 spaces per room, proportionately less than that approved for other nearby hotels. Given the site’s low PTAL level, TfL considers this is an acceptable number of spaces in line with London Plan policy 6.13.

41 TfL notes a private minibus service is proposed to enable visitors to travel to the Excel centre. More details are required including its justification. It should not detract from access being primarily by public transport and the encouragement of short journeys to be made either on foot and/or cycling.

42 To encourage the uptake of electrical vehicles TfL recommends that 10% of all spaces should have active electric vehicle charging points (EVCPs) with a further 10% having passive provision in line with London Plan Policy 6.13. Both Blue Badge Parking and EVCPs should be secured by condition.

43 Four unmarked coach drop-off and pickup points are proposed on Dockside Road for vehicles transporting non residents on Friday and weekend evenings only. The London Plan standard for coach parking would require eight spaces for the 377 hotel rooms alone. Therefore, TfL requests provision of further on site coach parking, and/or demonstration of arrangements for shared use of parking at other nearby sites. In addition, TfL does not support the use of unmarked bays due to the risk that existing parking restrictions may prevent coaches parking/waiting or that coaches may not be able to set down or pick up as other vehicles have parked at the site.

44 A 14 vehicle taxi stand is proposed, which is strongly supported by TfL. However clarification is needed of the layout of the facility. Separate provision must also be made for private hire vehicles (PHVs) which are not permitted to use taxi ranks (this classification includes limousines and chauffeur driven vehicles) and the proposed hotel minibus service.

45 TfL requests further information on how the taxi rank, other drop off/pick up facilities, on and off site coach parking and the proposed hotel minibus service will be managed and recommends a parking, servicing and site management plan as a condition.

Public Transport 46 The level of DLR trips generated by the proposal alone is unlikely to result in significant capacity impacts. However, to reduce the impact of the additional trips on Royal Albert station during the busiest evening periods, TfL requests that the applicant stagger event times to allow a steady flow of arrivals and departures.

47 The platforms at Royal Albert station are not long enough to accommodate the three car trains that are considered necessary to meet cumulative demand in the area. Therefore, TfL is seeking contributions from developers of sites served by the station towards platform lengthening, in line with London Plan Policy 6.2 and the emerging Royal Docks Infrastructure Study. A contribution towards these costs is likely to be applicable to this proposal and will be determined once the DLR trip generation is received.

48 TfL requests the applicant installs real-time departure information screens, linked to DAISY (Docklands Arrival Information System), within the common areas on the ship. This should be fully funded by the applicant and is recommended by TfL in order to promote sustainable travel in accordance with London Plan policy 6.1.

page 7 49 It is unlikely that this and nearby developments would justify bus service enhancements even if supported by s106 contributions.

50 The application site includes land under the DLR viaduct structure, which would be used during construction and for permanent car parking. Therefore, TfL has requested several conditions are included in the permission so that safe operation of the railway can be maintained at all times.

Walking and Cycling 51 In line with London Plan Policies 6.9 and 6.10, and as identified in the emerging Royal Docks Infrastructure Study, TfL recommends a S106 contribution of £100,000 is made towards local walking and cycling improvements, which is proportionately the same as that recently sought and secured from nearby hotel developments.

52 In addition details, including layout and management, should be provided by the applicant showing how public access to, and along the dockside, can be maintained and enhanced given the berthed ship and associated land side works and operations.

53 20 secure and covered cycle parking spaces are proposed. This level of provision is supported by TfL and is in line with the standards in Table 6.3 of the London Plan for hotel, restaurant and leisure use classes. In accordance with London Plan policy 6.9, shower, changing and locker facilities should be available for staff. These facilities should be secured by condition.

Travel Plan 54 TfL welcomes the submission of the travel plan. However, this failed the ATTrBuTE test and in order to accord with London Plan policy 6.3 and 6.11, further work is therefore required. The travel plan should be secured, enforced, monitored and reviewed as part of the s106 agreement. It should cover staff, guests and non residents using the ship’s facilities.

Summary 55 Overall, TfL has no significant objections to the principle of the proposed development. In order to comply with the transport policies of the London Plan, further information is required on public transport trip generation especially on DLR services, coach parking, the minibus service, taxi and other pick up/drop off facilities, EVCPs, waterside access and on the travel plan. Contributions are sought towards DLR platform lengthening and pedestrian/cycle improvements. Local planning authority’s position

56 The local planning authority’s position is not known. Legal considerations

57 Under the arrangements set out in Article 4 of the Town and Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008 the Mayor is required to provide the local planning authority with a statement setting out whether he considers that the application complies with the London Plan, and his reasons for taking that view. Unless notified otherwise by the Mayor, the Council must consult the Mayor again under Article 5 of the Order if it subsequently resolves to make a draft decision on the application, in order that the Mayor may decide whether to allow the draft decision to proceed unchanged, or direct the Council under Article 6 of the Order to refuse the application, or issue a direction under Article 7 of the Order that he is to act as the local planning authority for the purpose of determining the application and any connected application. There is no obligation at this present stage for the Mayor to indicate his intentions regarding a possible direction, and no such decision should be inferred from the Mayor’s statement and comments.

page 8 Financial considerations

58 There are no financial considerations at this stage. Conclusion

59 That Newham Council be advised that further discussion is needed before it can be said that the proposal complies with London Plan policy for the reasons set out below:

 Land use principle: Berthing of a ship in this area would add to the diversity and vibrancy of the dock and, although it results in the partial infilling of the dock, this could be acceptable subject to impact on navigation, hydrology and biodiversity of the water. Hotel use in this area is in line with London Plan policy however, the impact on rowing in the dock needs further discussion before it can be said that the land use principle is acceptable. Further discussion is also needed on the ecological impact of the proposal. There is also concern that the berthing of the ship in this location results in sub-optimal use of the adjacent dockside sites and further discussion is needed of the impact of this proposal on future development.

 Urban design: There are no strategic design issues arising from the design of the ship itself however, there is concern over the impact its location will have on the future development of the sites in the vicinity in terms of overshadowing. In addition the applicant should submit a maintenance statement to give assurance that the ship will not become an eyesore over time.

 Flood risk: The sustainable drainage measures should be conditioned and the applicant should confirm that no surface water will be discharged to the Dock.

 Climate change mitigation: There are no strategic issues relating to climate change mitigation however, the Council should consider conditioning ongoing measurement of carbon dioxide emissions against an agreed baseline to demonstrate reductions equivalent to a land based development.

 Transport: TfL has no significant objections to the principle of the proposed development however, further information is required on public transport trip generation especially on DLR services as well as coach parking, the minibus service, taxi and other pick up/drop off facilities, EVCP’s, waterside access and on the travel plan. Contributions are sought towards DLR platform lengthening and pedestrian/cycle improvements.

for further information, contact Planning Decisions Unit: Colin Wilson, Senior Manager - Planning Decisions 020 7983 4783 email [email protected] Justin Carr, Strategic Planning Manager (Development Decisions) 020 7983 4895 email [email protected] Emma Williamson, Case Officer 020 7983 6590 email [email protected]

page 9