Gatwick Airport Northern Runway

The list below includes a record of advice we have provided for this project. For a list of all advice issued by the Planning Inspectorate, including non-project related advice, please go to the Register of advice page.

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, including the name of the person who requested the advice, and to make this publicly available.

Preview
Enquiry received via email
In relation to post-submission, we have a specific question at this stage about process. Our understanding was that the post-acceptance/pre-examination stage would take three months but GAL has suggested that it determines how quickly the application moves to the examination stage. We also understand that GAL will publish a S56 notice giving 28 days’ notice (is this a minimum?) for Relevant Representations to be submitted. Is there a deadline after acceptance when PINS would expect GAL to publish the S56 notice? If not, this would suggest that GAL could prolong the pre-examination phase indefinitely. Also, we understand that S58 requires GAL to inform the Secretary of State (SoS) that the S56 notice has been served. Again, is there a deadline after serving the S56 notice that GAL would have to inform the SoS under S58, which presumably triggers the request for local authorities to submit their Local Impact Reports under S60. Lastly (and understanding that your answers to the above questions are relevant), if GAL’s submission is accepted by the end of April 2023, when would the Preliminary Meeting likely take place? In July 2023 (i.e. three months after acceptance) or would PINS delay until after the summer holidays, so in September 2023?
In respect of your question regarding the length of the Pre-examination stage, please note that this stage starts from the day after the issuing of an Acceptance decision, and finishes on the day that the Preliminary Meeting is concluded. There is no statutory timeframe for this stage, and its length is applicant-driven to some extent, in that an applicant would determine when the Relevant Representation period opens; however, the (former) Department for Communities and Local Government’s (DCLG) Examination Guidance states that ”the Secretary of State’s expectation is that, in most cases, [the preliminary meeting] should take place within a period from six weeks to two months from receipt of the relevant representations” (paragraph 40). In response to your query about section 56 notices, an applicant’s section 56 notice would need to provide a period of at least 30 days for Relevant Representations to be submitted to the Planning Inspectorate, on the assumption that the Proposed Development is Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) development. The minimum timeframe is 28 days only for projects that are not EIA development. As mentioned above, the start of the Relevant Representation period is applicant-driven, and the Planning Inspectorate does not have the power to compel an applicant to issue its section 56 notice and start the Relevant Representation period within a certain timeframe; however, the DCLG Examination Guidance states “Rarely, applicants may wish to delay the start of the examination of an accepted application. Such a delay may be appropriate, depending on the circumstances, but should be kept to the minimum period necessary. This will limit the risk that the application, including pre-application consultation and environmental information, will no longer be sufficiently current to form the basis of an examination” (paragraph 45). You have also queried whether there is a deadline by which an applicant must issue its section 58 certificate, which certifies compliance with section 56 of the Planning Act 2008. Regulation 10 of the Infrastructure Planning (Applications: Prescribed Forms and Procedure) Regulations 2009 confirms that the section 58 certificate must be provided to the Planning Inspectorate within the period of 10 working days following the end date of the Relevant Representation period. The Examining Authority will subsequently determine the date for submission of Local Impact Reports. It is common for this date to be confirmed in the Rule 6 letter (the notification of the Preliminary Meeting, incorporating a draft Examination Timetable), and then again in the Rule 8 letter (the final Examination Timetable) following the Preliminary Meeting.” Regarding your final question, the date of the Preliminary Meeting will depend on several factors, including the dates for the Relevant Representation period, and various logistical and procedural considerations. The date of the Preliminary Meeting is confirmed by way of a Procedural Decision in the Rule 6 letter from the Examining Authority appointed during the Pre-examination stage, and therefore is it not possible to determine the date ahead of this decision being made. Nevertheless, the DCLG Examination Guidance (as referred to above) provides an indication of what is considered to be a suitable length of time for the Preliminary Meeting to take place after the Relevant Representation period has closed under normal circumstances.

18 November 2022
Gatwick Officers Group - anon.
response has attachments
Project Update Meeting
Please see attached

16 September 2022
Gatwick Airport Limited (GAL) - anon.
Enquiry received via meeting
response has attachments
During the meeting between the Applicant and the Planning Inspectorate on 16 September 2022, the Applicant queried how socio-economic effects from diminution in property value had been addressed through scoping for other similar projects. Please note that a meeting note of the meeting held on 16 September 2022 has been published on the s51 advice tab of the project webpage
In response to your query about property values, I had a look at Heathrow and Luton and whilst for Luton, the topic of property prices has not [been] addressed through scoping, Heathrow had mentioned providing financial compensation to households to reduce any adverse effects. The Inspectorate requested that the ES demonstrates how this reduces adverse effects. I would recommend looking at guidance as I said, both for human health and for socio-economics as hopefully this can provide some sort of steer. Here is a link to the Heathrow Scoping Opinion and Scoping Report page on our website: [attachment 1];stage=1&filter1=Environmental+Impact+Assessment+Scoping Ultimately, the Inspectorate requires the ES to provide evidence sufficient to support the Applicant’s position on the matter and where possible, methodologies should be agreed with the relevant consultation bodies and supported by appropriate guidance

16 September 2022
Gatwick Airport Limited - anon.
Enquiry received via meeting
response has attachments
GATCOM Meeting
Please see attached link to the Planning Inspectorate’s presentation to the GATCOM meeting on 28 April 2022. Please note that the presentation was not intended to cover all aspects of the overarching Planning Act 2008 process. [attachment 1]

28 April 2022
Gatwick Airport Consultative Committee (GATCOM) - anon.
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
I note you have mentioned raising concerns at the AoC stage. As GATCOM is not a Local Authority, does this apply?
Please see attached.

22 March 2022
Gatwick Airport Consultative Committee (GATCOM) - anon.
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
I have another matter on which I wish to seek advice about the DCO process. Having read the Inspectorate’s guidance it is not clear what remedies are available to interested parties to raise issues where it is believed the pre-application consultation material was inaccurate and misleading which could affect the views expressed at the pre-application consultation stage and therefore skew the results of the consultation exercise. There is growing concern amongst some GATCOM members about the supporting evidence that Gatwick Airport Limited provided in relation to the carbon cost values used to demonstrate the economic benefits of the Northern Runway Scheme. Gatwick’s calculations were based on the Government’s old carbon cost values and not the new cost values issued a few days prior to the launch of Gatwick’s consultation. I fully appreciate that you are not in a position to comment on the evidence provided to date and I accept that it is not unusual over the course of preparing a submission of an application, particularly for complex/large scale development projects, for circumstances and evidence to change. Attached is a recent letter the Chairman wrote to a GATCOM member in response to concerns they had raised as way of background to my advice request from the Inspectorate. The GATCOM Chairman has since been asked by a few members to have an opportunity to discuss this matter at a GATCOM meeting to help build an understanding of the process and of the remedies available to correct information/evidence and seek views on changed circumstances prior to the submission of the application. We have an item on the agenda for the GATCOM meeting on 28 April 2022 for members to share their concerns. It would be helpful therefore if you could provide advice on the mechanisms available for stakeholders and the public, and at what stage in the process, where concerns of this nature can be raised and addressed.
Please see attached.

18 March 2022
Gatwick Airport Consultative Committee (GATCOM) - anon.
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
I wonder if you could shed some light on a matter related to Gatwick’s preparation of its DCO application please? Gatwick Airport Limited (GAL) published as part of its pre-application consultation a proposed noise envelope. This was the first time that interested parties had been advised of the proposal and there had not been any engagement with local authorities or other community interests on the proposal development of the noise envelope design. GAL’s proposal for a noise envelope is a strategically important moment for dealing with noise in and around Gatwick Airport. It is not yet known whether GAL intends to seek further engagement on the evolving design or whether it will just submit the final design taking into account pre-application consultation feedback as part of the application submission. The Chair of GATCOM and the Chair of Gatwick’s Noise Management Executive Board have a meeting with GAL next Monday (7 March) to discuss a way forward on how GAL can achieve an appropriately inclusive process, further engagement on, and development of, the noise envelope before GAL’s submission of the DCO application. This is an issue of great concern to many interested parties as the CAA’s guidance on noise envelope preparation and design in CAP 1129 sets out a series of consultation requirements for noise envelope design and changes which have not been observed to date. GATCOM hopes that GAL will, once it has considered pre-application consultation feedback, look to observe the noise envelope design process set out in the CAA’s guidance. However, we do not wish to press for this if the further engagement required as part of that process would not be in accordance with or bring into question the requirements of the DCO process. Please can you advise? Does the DCO process override the CAA’s guidance or is there still scope to have further engagement with interested parties, including communities?
Please see attached.

18 March 2022
Gatwick Airport Consultative Committee (GATCOM) - anon.
Enquiry received via meeting
response has attachments
Project Update Meeting.
Please see attached.

11 February 2022
Gatwick Airport Limited (GAL) - anon.
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
1. In relation to local authorities, and I’m thinking here specifically of Crawley Borough Council, please can you confirm where the roles are specified? 2. Under section 42 – the duty to consult about the proposed application – does this include the PEIR stage or is it one of the later stages? 3. Under s46 of the Planning Act 2008 should the applicant have provided the Secretary of State with a full copy of the PEIR? 4. Under examination, do you only consider matters where there is contention between the promoter and someone giving evidence; or will you actively review all the application? I am wondering what would happen if no-one commented on the proposal despite the consultation.
1. Whilst local authorities play a vital role participating in the pre application process, once an application is submitted, you will have multiple roles depending on the stage the application is at and if development consent is granted, you are likely to become responsible for discharging requirements (akin to planning conditions) and monitoring and enforcing many of the DCO provisions and requirements associated with the NSIP. Further details about the role of local authorities can be found in Advice Note two: the role of local authorities in the development consent process: [attachment 1]. 2. As part of their pre-application consultation duties, Applicants are required to prepare a Statement of Community Consultation (SoCC). This sets out how the local community will be consulted about the Proposed Development, in accordance with section 47 of the PA2008. The SoCC must state whether the Proposed Development is EIA development and, if it is, how the Applicant intends to publicise and consult on PEI (Regulation 12 of the EIA Regulations 2017). Whilst the Inspectorate encourages Applicants to provide PEI to enable the statutory consultees (technical and non technical) to understand the environmental effects of the development and to inform the consultation, the approach to the PEI (and statutory consultation) as a whole are matters for the Applicant as they are not required to provide a PEIR when undertaking formal consultation. Therefore, it is for them to decide at what stage in the pre-application process this will be most effective. 3. When notifying the Planning Inspectorate of a proposed application for an order granting development consent for the purposes of section 46 of the PA2008, the Applicant is required to provide the same information as supplied for consultation under section 42. In relation to the Gatwick Airport NSIP, the Applicant provided the Inspectorate with a full copy of its PEIR on 6 September 2021. 4. During Pre Examination, an appointed examining authority in compliance with s88(1) of the PA2008 is under duty to make an initial assessment of Principal Issues which will be prepared following its reading of the application documents, the relevant representations received in respect of the application and its consideration of any other important and relevant matters. Whilst this will not be a comprehensive or exclusive list of all the issues, the ExA will have regard to all important and relevant matters during Examination and when its writes its Recommendation report to the Secretary of state.

28 January 2022
Crawley Borough Council - anon.
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
what work has PINS done, or plans to do, to confirm that the baseline level of 61 million passengers set out in Gatwick's Scoping Report is appropriate.
As part of the development consent process and Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), the Applicant is required to prepare an Environmental Statement accompanying the DCO application which must contain information about the Proposed Development and its environmental effects and include information reasonably required for reaching a reasoned conclusion on the significant environmental effects. Whilst we note the issues you have raised, they are not matters that we can take a view on prior to submission as the Inspectorate has no role in confirming whether a baseline level proposed by an Applicant is appropriate. It is for the Applicant to set out such matters as part of their application documents (and pre-application consultations, where appropriate) and at the point of submission during the acceptance stage, the Inspectorate (on behalf of the Secretary of State) will have to decide whether or not the application meets the standards required to be accepted for examination. As you may already be aware, the Applicant is about to embark on their statutory consultation which includes their Preliminary Environmental Information Report (PEIR). It is likely that their PEIR will contain further details about the approach to the environmental assessments in this regard although please note the content of the PEIR and consultation process as a whole are matters for the Applicant. In shaping their application, the Applicant has a duty to have regard to issues raised during the statutory consultation and so we strongly recommend you continue to raise your concerns especially at this part in the process, in response to the Applicants consultation. Further details of this can be found on their project website at: [attachment 1]. If an application is accepted for examination, an examining authority will be appointed, and they will consider all relevant and important matters through the examination process and have a duty to have regard to any submissions made by interested parties.

09 September 2021
Gatwick Area Conservation Campaign - anon.
Enquiry received via meeting
response has attachments
Project Update Meeting.
Please see attached.

19 August 2021
Gatwick Airport Limited - anon.
Enquiry received via meeting
response has attachments
Project Update Meeting.
Please see attached.

03 February 2021
Gatwick Airport Limited - anon.
Enquiry received via meeting
response has attachments
Project Update Meeting (post-EIA Scoping)
Please see attached.

15 November 2019
Gatwick Airport Limited - anon.
Enquiry received via meeting
response has attachments
Project update meeting and site visit.
Please see attached meeting note.

09 July 2019
Gatwick Airport Limited - anon.
Enquiry received via meeting
response has attachments
Inception meeting.
Please see attached meeting note.

31 January 2019
Gatwick Airport Limited - anon.