Airport loses bid to overturn Saturday afternoon flights ban

London City Airport (LCA) has lost its bid to overturn a ban on Saturday afternoon flights – but has been granted permission to increase its annual number of passengers.

Bosses at the site in Newham, east London, had wanted its current 12.30pm Saturday curfew to be pushed back to 6.30pm.

However, the government has now ruled the restrictions should continue following opposition from residents and campaigners.

A bid by the airport to increase its annual passenger cap from 6.5 million to 9 million by 2031 was approved, although the maximum number of flights allowed – up to 111,000 per year – remains unchanged.

LCA said new “cleaner and quieter” planes with more seats would allow for an increase in passenger numbers.

Campaign group HACAN East described the government’s ruling as a “big win for residents”, while the mayor of Newham Rokhsana Fiaz said it was a “victory” for people living in the area.

However, the airport was also successful in securing approval for a shake-up of flight times, with the number of early-morning flights increasing from six to nine, which Ms Faiz said was “deeply” concerning.

She added: “We will be studying the decision notice carefully and considering all options as we remain concerned about the detrimental impacts on the health and quality of life of our residents.”

It comes after the airport’s initial application to ease flight restrictions – which ban take-offs and landings from 12.30pm on Saturdays to 12.30pm on Sundays – was rejected by Newham Council last year following concerns over the impact on climate change, pollution and noise.

The decision was then referred to the government after the airport appealed.

LCA said it was “disappointed” by the rejection of part of its appeal and said a later closing time on a Saturday “would have enabled more choice and flexibility for passengers”.

Chief executive Alison FitzGerald added: “As the government has recognised in its decision, rejecting our request to extend our Saturday afternoon operating hours will slow down airlines bringing cleaner, quieter next-generation aircraft to the airport.”

Meanwhile, some environmental groups hit out at the decision to allow an increase in passenger numbers, with Greenpeace UK describing it as a “surprising misstep undermining [the] UK’s climate leadership”.

The campaign organisation added: “It will also mostly benefit an elite of wealthy frequent fliers while dumping the environmental costs on some of London’s poorest neighbourhoods.

“Over half of the destinations served by the airport can be reached by train in under six hours, with Amsterdam and Edinburgh among the most popular routes. Instead of airport expansions, we need better and cheaper train travel.”

Johann Beckford, from thinktank Green Alliance, said: “This is a disappointing decision given the new government promised it would prioritise tackling climate change.

“Its own independent advisers, the Climate Change Committee, clearly state that airport expansion is currently incompatible with net zero.”

It comes after a public inquiry heard that people living in the area were suffering from sleep problems and anxiety due to noise from the airport’s planes, and feared Saturday afternoon flights would make the issues worse.

Be the first to get Breaking News

Install the Sky News app for free

A government report noted that some complained of having to keep doors and windows closed in warm weather, while also being forced to pause conversations while aircraft took off.

One man said he had spent more than £17,000 on soundproofing his home.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

A letter on behalf of Housing Secretary Angela Rayner and Transport Secretary Louise Haigh confirmed on Monday: “They have decided to grant planning permission [to LCA], subject to revised conditions that maintain the existing Saturday curfew period.”

A government spokesperson added: “We are committed to securing the long-term future of the aviation sector in the UK while protecting our environmental obligations.”

Read Entire Article