Representation by Stonewater Limited and associated companies (Stonewater Limited and associated companies)
- Date submitted
- 23 June 2023
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
Dear Sirs Expansion of London Luton Airport DCO Objection in response to notification of decision to accept an application for Examination for an Order Granting Development Consent for the London Luton Airport Expansion project (“the Order”) by the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Our clients: Stonewater Limited and associated companies Properties:- Land and roads surrounding A505 Luton, Land and properties at Albert Road, Surrey Street and Queens Close, Luton, Land to the East of Albert Road, Land at Chobham Walk, Luton, Land at Barn Owl Close, Luton, Land and properties at 1-18 Jephson Court, Holly Street, Luton. This letter is an objection to the Order being promoted by London Luton Airport Limited trading as Luton Rising for the expansion of London Luton Airport (“the Proposed Scheme”). Please note that Shakespeare Martineau LLP are appointed to act on behalf of Stonewater Limited and any other associated Stonewater companies (“SW”) affected by the Proposed Scheme. SW are an affordable housing provider, and are the owner and landlord of a vast number of residential properties in the vicinity of the airport. In terms of responding to this objection, please address any correspondence to [REDACTED]. Alternatively the postal address for Jack Randall and Julie Russell is as set out at the bottom of this representation. By way of background and as already communicated to the Promoter, the previous section 42 consultation letter did not identify the postal addresses for our client’s properties that resulted in Luton Rising (“the Promoter”) identifying SW as a potential Category 3 Statutory Consultee. Our client has chased the Promoter for further details regarding the properties impacted by the Proposed Scheme, but such information has not been forthcoming. Given the timeframes involved, our client’s formal objection to the Order is currently put forward on the basis that it does not have sufficient information to determine whether the Proposed Scheme will have adverse impacts on its land interests. Please note that whilst SW does not at this stage object to the principle of the Proposed Scheme it reserves its position in relation to the specific impact that the Scheme will have on its assets. It is understood that no substantive discussions between the Promoter and SW have, to date, taken place. In light of this: - We would be grateful if, as a matter of urgency, the Promoter could for each and every Property, confirm which indicative noise contour (if any) applies. - We note that there is extensive consultation material in the public domain. Given the circumstances it would be helpful if the Promoter could confirm where impacts, mitigation measures and safeguards that might be of interest to our client are dealt with in the consultation documentation, giving precise references to the page numbers and schedules of the relevant documents. - Our client is the registered proprietor of the Properties which we understand will be impacted by the Scheme. However, our client has been provided with no detail in terms of the potential impact of the Scheme on its land holding/assets. We therefore reserve the right to make further representations in the event that it becomes apparent that the Scheme will have an adverse impact on our client’s interests. In addition the right is reserved to object to the Proposed Scheme in respect of SW’s other interests in the vicinity of the Properties listed above. In particular, we are concerned that the Land Interest Questionnaires only cover a fraction of the properties within the vicinity of the airport in which our client has an interest. In particular, it is noted that the questionnaires do not relate to our client’s properties that are actually closest to the airport – these being at Colwell Rise, Thaxted Close and Cutlers Green. SW is an Affordable Housing Provider with a variety of products and interests. Given the large number of properties that SW have interests in in the vicinity of the Proposed Development boundary, the tenure of some of the affected properties is thought likely to be shared ownership. Accordingly, the calculation of compensation may involve complex calculations with the interests of private individuals/SW customers feeding into the calculation. With that in mind, early and meaningful engagement between our client and the Promoter is considered essential. For that reason, it is critical that our client understands which of its interests the Promoter has identified as potentially affected and the potential impact of the Proposed Scheme. Our client would therefore welcome a discussion with the Promoter as soon as possible. We would be grateful if you could acknowledge receipt of this objection. Yours faithfully Shakespeare Martineau No 1 Colmore Square Birmingham B4 6AA DX 721090 Birmingham 43 [REDACTED]