HC Deb 28 July 1988 vol 138 cc443-4W
Mr. Colvin

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment when he intends to announce his decision on the planning application for the line of the road and the east London river crossing; and if he will make a statement on its relationship with the London City airport.

Mr. Channon

I have been asked to reply.

I am pleased to announce that, in conjunction with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment, I have decided that the A406 east London river crossing will be built with a new bridge across the Thames. This follows our consideration of the report from the inspector who conducted local public inquiries between September 1985 and December 1986.

The inspector recommended that the Department of Transport's scheme, including a new cable-stayed bridge across the Thames, should be built. He rejected alternative tunnel options.

We have decided to defer a decision on the design of the bridge. The inspector considered that a dual three-lane standard would eventually be needed. With the design originally proposed, it would not be possible to provide three full-width lanes. We also accept the inspector's recommendation that the design should incorporate a segregated cycleway. We considered late objections, forwarded to us by the inspector without comment, from Eurocity Express and the Air Transport Users Committee. These objections concerned the height of the towers of the proposed Thames bridge, which would limit options for future use of London City airport.

I am therefore asking the consultants for the scheme to investigate whether there is an alternative design for the bridge which would be practicable, acceptable and within the broad order of costs of the Department's proposed bridge, and which would satisfy the objectives of the scheme, and keep open options for future use of the airport.

The inspector recommended a number of modifications to the Department's proposals. One of these was his proposal to provide about 400 m of cut-and-cover tunnel through part of Oxleas wood and to delete the south-facing slip roads at the Shooters hill interchange. Having carefully weighed the advantages and disadvantages of the inspector's proposal, we are not satisfied that the additional cost of the tunnel and the loss of benefits from deletion of the slip roads are justified. We have decided not to accept this recommendation.

Those parts of the orders relating to the line and most of the side road orders will now be made. The inspector also recommended that the draft compulsory purchase orders should be made, and that the three certificates for exchange land should be granted. We have deferred decisions on these.

Copies of the inspector's report and our decision letter are being placed in the Library.