Representation by Ian Tokelove
- Date submitted
- 31 March 2021
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
I oppose the Development promoted by London Resort Company Holdings for the following reasons: Inadequate consultation The London Resort’s public consultation was flawed, as it was devoid of the detail which would allow an informed response. It talked of aims and proposals but gave little factual information. The public consultation was carefully worded to avoid unfavourable responses. The London Resort stated that public contribution to the consultation would ‘help shape’ their DCO application. Many members of the public had no intention of ‘helping’ the London Resort and would not have taken part in the consultation. The London Resort failed to say that responses to the public consultation were an important part of the planning application process. As such, I and many others did not take part. Biodiversity The development will wipe out much of this SSSI. Promises of mitigation cannot save what will be lost. Planting trees and creating saltmarsh cannot replace rare invertebrates and flora. The development will sever the vital connectivity between the marshes and wetland habitats to east and west. Connectivity is vital for wildlife to flourish, to find food and a mate. Water voles cannot navigate theme parks. Loss of connectivity is one of the major threats to British wildlife today. Swanscombe Peninsula is an important stepping stone for migrating birds as they follow the Thames Estuary, a quiet and undisturbed place to rest and feed. The theme park will destroy this safe space, negatively impacting on numerous endangered species. Ecosystem services In 2015, a small (0.8 hectares) former brownfield site near King’s Cross, featuring similar wetland features to the Peninsula, was found to provide natural benefits which were contributing £2.8 million to the local economy each year. Scaled up, Swanscombe Peninsula could already be providing benefits of £1.6 billion to Swanscombe, Northfleet and Greenhithe each year. Much of this will be lost if development goes ahead. [] Health and wellbeing Swanscombe Peninsula is a vital green space for the rapidly growing, urbanised populations which surround it. Although currently underutilised, there is huge scope for opening the space to much larger numbers of visitors, while protecting and enhancing the important wildlife habitats. Conservation groups have the knowledge and skills to do this and can generate sufficient revenue to finance their work. The Ebbsfleet Development Corporation, as the planning authority for Ebbsfleet Garden City, recognised the local value of the Peninsula, reimagining it as an “expansive wetland park consolidating 3 marshes into one coherent ecological reserve” The potential of this vision still exists. [] Sustainability and net-zero Again, the London Resort only offers ‘aims’ and ‘proposals’. It is highly unlikely that a development of this size can be either sustainable or net-zero. The Resort’s claims of sustainability ignore the environmental impact of the ongoing operation of the Resort – which reach far down the supply chain and carry a global impact. Every single visitor to the theme park will create an environmental impact, as will every item of food, fuel or other supplies and every item of waste. A huge theme park cannot be sustainable, or net-zero, such claims are simply empty words.