The list below includes a record of advice we have provided for this project.
-
Request for clarification in respect of s51 advice issued to enquirer on 19 July 2019.
-
Please tell us will the examiners still consider all the oral and written submissions to the DCO enquiry made by SHP as we believe most of it is still relevant to the application by RSP?
-
As I hope you can imagine, the decision by the owners of the site to sell the land to the applicants at the eleventh hour is causing some consternation in the areas which are likely to be most...
Read more
-
I would be grateful if you could update me on the position with regard tot he SHP evidence submitted during the course of the Inquiry and whether this still falls to be considered by the Examining...
Read more
-
Could you please confirm that a) all Stone Hill Park's submissions will stand and be used by the Examiners in making their recommendation; and b) that Stone Hill Park's submissions will still carry...
Read more
-
I have just seen the letter from SHP in which it says that, subject to satisfactory completion of its land sale to RSP, it will withdraw its objections to the DCO. What does this mean? The evidence...
Read more
-
I raise two important Issues on which we need clarification, as follows: 1) The ExA policy regarding, and the status of, late (post 9/7/19) submissions accepted after the close of the examination. 2)...
Read more
-
As per the 3rd paragraph of this letter could you confirm whether every submission from SHP and their associates will remain on the PINS website for the full 5 years as per your original response...
Read more
-
We have just read SHP’s latest letter to the examiners regarding the sale to RSP in which they state they wish to withdraw their objections & representations on completion of the sale. We understand...
Read more
-
Can you please confirm the SHP’s submissions posted to your website are a matter of public record and cannot be withdrawn or ‘unknown’ by yourselves and will continued to be relied- upon?
-
I understand that following the sale by SHP to RSP last week, SHP are obliged to withdraw all their evidence and objections to the DCO. Can you tell me whether they are able to do this and if so does...
Read more
-
I am writing seeking reassurance that the written submissions by Stone Hill Park already submitted to you, and posted on your website, will remain in the public domain.
-
I have just seen the letter from SHP in which it says that, subject to satisfactory completion of its land sale to RSP, it will withdraw its submissions/objections to the Manston DCO. Surely this...
Read more
-
I understand that it is the intention of the Applicant to make subsequent submissions directly to the SoST. Will these submissions be published on the Project website in a timely manner? Will IPs be...
Read more
-
i. Will RSP's interactions with the SoS be transparent? If not why not? ii. Can people opposed to RSP's cargo hub plans comment on RSP's submissions to the SoS and/or lobby the SoS? If so, will the...
Read more
-
Request for confirmation of receipt and acceptance into Examination of letters from Stone Hill Park Ltd and Kent Facilities Ltd, both dated 9 July 2019.
-
I note that RSP have said they will make further representations directly to the Secretary of State after the 9 July closing. Is this possible and if so are other interested parties also able to make...
Read more
-
On further reading of BDB’s letter to PINS regarding the sale of Manston to RSP they seem to be inferring RSP will be dealing with the Secretary of State directly. Could you tell me if that is a...
Read more
-
How long do submissions stay up on the Planning Inspectorate website? And, secondly is it all submissions that stay up?
-
I read that failure to adhere to a voluntary scoping opinion is conclusively fatal to a DCO in terms of the new EU settlement. Is that PINS's understanding too?
-
In a previous question, I asked whether a development consent obligation could be imposed upon the applicant during or as a result of the examination.
Could you also tell me whether it might be...
Read more
-
I have had very little time to examine the 11,000 pages of the DCO application since it was submitted. My old school, Lord Mayor Treloar College for the Disabled, is implicated in the current infected...
Read more
-
What action has or will be taken to ensure that representations (from both sides) are above board and genuine? I sincerely have no problem with genuine representations opposed to the Airport – we live...
Read more
-
On your web page for this project it states that "The Applicant (RiverOak Strategic Partners Ltd) must certify to the Planning Inspectorate that it has complied with its application notification...
Read more
-
The National Planning Guidance states that section 106 agreements should be used to mitigate the effects of otherwise unacceptable developments.
I know that RSP have argued against a 106 agreement...
Read more
-
I have a question regarding whether pins can limit a sponsors project plans when granting a DCO.
All interested parties whether for or against the airport, SMA, SMAA, SUMA, NNF, Craig Mackinlay MP...
Read more
-
The enquirer requested information on how a group of persons could register and make representations.
-
However, you have failed to address the two points I raised, these being :
1. Whether the Planning Inspectorate is concerned about DCO applicants lying about their applications, apparently with...
Read more
-
Now that the Manston DCO is entering the examination stage can you tell me if PINS will be calling on experts in the various fields needed to test RSP’s application claims, i.e. their business plan,...
Read more
-
From the information in the public domain it is not clear what has changed with regard to RSP's submission that allowed this change of stance where the previous advice, regarding RSP's withdrawn...
Read more
-
I would like to register as an interested party in the Manston Airport Application for a national infrastructure project and note on your guidance that all contact details that you receive as part of...
Read more
-
My questions are as follows:
1. Which of the 4 elements that Riveroak claim limit the existing capability of Manston to zero did you rely on in arriving at you conclusion that its has zero inherent...
Read more
-
The first question asked what weight, if any, PINS gave to the detailed and substantial factual evidence submitted to it regarding the misrepresentation by the applicant of his proposals during the...
Read more
-
Can you confirm that the Planning Inspectorate is not concerned if a DCO applicant makes public statements containing lies, as long as these lies do not directly involve the processes set out in the...
Read more
-
i have just read the explanation given on page 120 of the applicant's Planning Statement regarding his astonishing disregard of the extensive representations made by the host local authority in...
Read more
-
I am currently reading the Environmental Statement, to ensure that any representations engage directly with what the application.
I find that the problems created by the length and complexity of...
Read more
-
Following the submission for a DCO made by Riveroak I would like to ask about compulsory acquisition.
I believe, as part of their submission Riveroak are asking for a compulsory acquisition of the...
Read more
-
As an "Interested party" living within half a mile of the flight path of any proposed cargo aircraft landing at Manston, which they will have to do in my case at a height of some 200meters, at least...
Read more
-
The following persons attempted to make comments to the Inspectorate on the merits of the Proposed Development between 17 and 31 August 2018:
Tony and June Bate; Marc Flint; Margaret and Ken...
Read more
-
About a week ago, the website said that interest could be registered from September 3, but that date has now been removed from the website. Is there a reason for this?
-
I didn't think this would be such a bureaucratic process. I have given my thoughts and there will be nothing more from me.
-
Perhaps there is some way of making RSP put the documents online, on an ordinary, navigable and searchable website.
Online as a serried of pdfs where you can’t really tell what information they...
Read more
-
Several people have expressed concerns that, should they register as interested parties for the Manston Airport DCO, their names and possibly addresses will be made public on the Planning Inspectorate...
Read more
-
1. You have decided that the project is a NISP ?
2. That RSP have addressed to your satisfaction on the issues you raised with them regarding their initial submission which they withdrew ?
3. You...
Read more
-
Does PINS routinely accept for examination plans for developments where the money will be raised at a later date?
Did PINS consider how the project would be funded before accepting this application...
Read more
-
Up until yesterday, the PINS website showed a date for the opening of registration of interested parties. Today, the website shows that you will publish the date for registration, implying that the...
Read more
-
I write further to the statement issued by Tony Freudmann to KMTV, which was published yesterday and which is at approximately 19 minutes into the broadcast which can be found at the following link :...
Read more
-
I note that it is now time for the applicant, RiverOak Strategic Partners Ltd to publicise the fact that its application has been accepted for examination and invite people who are interested in the...
Read more
-
I am looking for guidance on what role if any the applicant/developer has during the Examination stage of a DCO. For example are they present at all hearings and do they have a right to cross examine...
Read more
-
I note from RSPs submission that they seem to be claiming that with the number of stands they are providing they could support over 83,000 movements, way in excess of the additional 10,000 over...
Read more