The list below is a record of advice the Planning Inspectorate has provided in respect of the Planning Act 2008 process.
There is a statutory duty under section 51 of the Planning Act 2008 to record the advice that is given in relation to an application or a potential application and to make this publicly available. Advice we have provided is recorded below together with the name of the person or organisation who asked for the advice and the project it relates to. The privacy of any other personal information will be protected in accordance with our Information Charter which you should view before sending information to the Planning Inspectorate.
Note that after a project page has been created for a particular application, any advice provided that relates to it will also be published under the ‘s51 advice’ tab on the relevant project page.
Advice given between between 1 October 2009 and 14 April 2015 has been archived. View the archived advice.
The London Resort View all advice for this project
Dear Sirs Many thanks for your e-mail dated Monday, 10th February. I note under 'COMPULSORY ACQUISITION' it is stated: "The Applicant explained that the company’s in the nearby industrial estate have all banded together and are now represented by a professional adviser." I must stress that this is a totally inaccurate statement and, subject to their own decisions, each business will be individually represented by professional advisers. Furthermore I should stress there are four separate industrial estates, all in separate single or multi party ownership, along with infrastructure and other land holdings which are also in separate ownership. I also note that in the project overview it states: "The application is expected to be submitted to the Planning Inspectorate Q4 2020.". However, in the meeting minutes final paragraph it refers to DCO submission in Q2 2020 - which is correct? I should also be grateful if you could forward me a list of those people who attended the meeting. Finally, the last occasion on which the businesses had any communication or contact from LRCH, applicants for The London Resort Project, was in July 2018. Best wishes Dan Bramwell On behalf of PMG
Dear Mr Bramwell, Thank you for your email in relation to the note of the meeting held between the Planning Inspectorate’s (the Inspectorate) and the London Resort Company Holdings (LRCH) (the Applicant) on 8 October 2019. The information on the Compulsory Acquisition (CA) progress was provided by the Applicant and whilst we are able to highlight any concerns raised with us to Applicants, it is not for the Inspectorate to examine the CA during the pre-application stage of the project. Once an Application is submitted for a Development Consent Order (DCO), if accepted for Examination, the appointed Examining Authority will assess the information and ensure that the relevant tests are met to allow the Applicant to obtain any land for the development. The submission date given in the meeting note (Q2 2020) was correct at the time of the meeting. The Applicant has subsequently updated the Inspectorate on the intended submission date, which they have now advised will be Q4 2020. It is not uncommon for Applicants to change the estimated submission date throughout the pre-application stage due to a host of factors. When the Inspectorate is provided with an updated submission date, it is reflected on the project webpage. Please note we no longer publish a list of attendees in meeting notes (for Inspectorate staff or other attendees). Our use and disclosure of personal information is governed by the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the Data Protection Act 2018. Please see the Inspectorate’s privacy notice for further details on how we process personal data. The Applicant may be inclined to divulge which parties attended the meeting from their team, but it is not for the Inspectorate to provide this information. As the project is still in the pre-application stage, I would strongly encourage you to continue to contact the Applicant directly with regard to your concerns as they have a statutory duty to have regard to all consultation responses which should be demonstrated in the Consultation Report as part of their DCO application. If you feel your comments are not being taken into account, I would advise you to also write to your local authority and set out why you think the Applicant is failing to conduct its consultation properly. Your comments will be considered by the local authority when sending the Inspectorate its representations on whether the Applicant has fulfilled its consultation duties which will be taken into account when deciding whether the application can be accepted for Examination. Kind regards,