Navitus Bay Wind Park

Section 51 advice

The list below includes a record of advice we have provided for this project.

There is a statutory duty, under section 51 of the Planning Act 2008, around an application or potential application. This includes recording the name of the person who requested advice and the advice given. This information has to be made publicly available.

Search advice

Search by key words or the name of person the advice was given to.

Showing 1 to 25 of 187 documents, newest first.

Results per page 25 | View 50 results per page | View 100 results per page

  • View meeting with Navitus Bay Development Limited

    Feedback meeting between Navitus Bay Development Limited and the Planning Inspectorate following the Secretary of State?s decisions on the Navitus Bay Wind Park project.

  • View advice to PCBA

    A number of our Association members have asked whether, in view of the unprecedented interest in this project, in addition to recording on the PINS website that the ExA Report has been sent to SoS, it... Read more

  • View advice to Bill Hoodless

    I should be grateful if you will respond to the following process query concerning the review of the noise issue by ExA. All the evidence so far presented has been on the basis of the ETSU... Read more

  • View advice to Roy Pointer

    The PCBA team and member supporters have raised some questions that I agreed to send to you; I should be glad of your advice. 1. Will you and the PINS team still be able to answer questions after... Read more

  • View advice to Bill Hoodless

    Question regarding the time the examination ends, and questions regarding ability to submit further documents after the final deadline today.

  • View advice to PCBA

    I see that this very large number of submissions for Deadline VII, yesterday, have today been placed on the PINS website. They include a huge amount of fresh information, especially from the... Read more

  • View advice to John Sharpe

    Would like to respond to aplicant last submssion, specifically the applicants Appendix 13: Taddiford Gap further clarifications note

  • View advice to Freeths LLP

    See attached letter from Freeths LLP on behalf of Challenge Navitus

  • View advice to Patrick Canavan

    I have been following the debate over the proposed Navitus Bay development very carefully. Not least because when I bought a house in the area recently this proposal came up on the local searches. I... Read more

  • View advice to Roy Pointer

    As the examination has progressed and the ExA has managed to draw more information from the Applicant, our residents? community has experienced a growing concern and interest in what the project might... Read more

  • View advice to Dorset County Council

    Dorset County Council responded to the Rule 17 letter issued by the Examining Authority on the 21 November 2014 requesting: ? A submission on the status and admissibility of the Turbine Area... Read more

  • View advice to PCBA

    As the Examination progresses, we continue to notice the wide disparity in the assessment of the noise implications of the proposal as between the Applicant and PCBA and others. The topic is complex... Read more

  • View advice to Bill Hoodless

    Clarification on the provision of documents within the examination timetable.

  • View advice to Bournemouth Borough Council

    We appreciate that in order to expedite the procedure for major infrastructure developments it is important that timetables are set and adhered for the submission of relevant documents and... Read more

  • View advice to Claire Coward

    Wishes to comment on the applicant, although is not an Interested Party.

  • View meeting with Local Authorities and NBDL

    Advice to Local authorities and the applicant involved in the Navitus Bay Wind park project in respect of s106 agreements, following a discussion at the issue specific hearing held 21 January 2015.

  • View advice to John Lambon

    Question regarding the submission of more up to date visuals for the Turbine Area Mitigation Option, and whether the applicant will be asked to submit them.

  • View advice to Angus Walker

    Please could you clarify whether the application now contains both the original turbine area and the turbine area mitigation option, or just the latter. If it contains both options, will the panel be... Read more

  • View advice to Mike Sanderson

    Further to the procedural decision by the Examining Authority can you please clarify the following points: - You have stated in point 1.1 ?the Examining Authority has decided that the Turbine Area... Read more

  • View advice to PCBA

    I am writing to express very considerable surprise that ExA has not invited Challenge Navitus, PCBA or their acoustic consultants to answer the questions set out in the Noise, Vibration and EMF... Read more

  • View advice to Toby Parker

    Query regarding the Mitigation Option submitted by the applicant as Appendix 43 to their Deadline III submission.

  • View advice to Christchurch and East Dorset C

    See attached letter

  • View advice to PCBA

    1. IPs have received the PINS? letter of 21 November twice. Is the second letter a duplicate of the first please? 2. During the discussion towards the end of the hearing on Thursday 20 November, in... Read more

  • View advice to Philip Collins

    See attached letter

  • View advice to PCBA

    I am writing following the recent meeting of PCBA Steering Group after the end of the two weeks of Issue Specific Hearings. Colleagues have become increasingly concerned at the way in which the... Read more