1. Section 51 advice
  2. Advice in detail

Advice to Janice Evans

Back to list

Enquiry

From
Janice Evans
Date advice given
26 September 2014
Enquiry type
Email

I am writing to lodge my complaint that the consultation for the proposed SRFI development by Roxhill was woefully inadequate and I request that the process be repeated with full and proper due process including proper advertising of the meetings and with a reasonable notice period of meetings.

Many people were (and still are!) completely unaware of the details of this proposal. I only found out about the meetings through a friend and was lucky that I could attend that evening. I have never received one of the flyers that was supposedly put through the door of Castle Donington residents. I live in Castle Donington and this is totally unacceptable.

What physical radius was allowed for this supposed consultation? Did it include Kegworth and other close lying localities?

This proposal is deeply unpopular in the area and should never even be considered in the proposed location which is prime farming land. This is a brown-field site development if ever there was one. I look forward to hearing from you with a commitment to do the right thing and ensure that this proposal is forced to go back through a full and proper consultation process.

Advice given

Pre-application consultation is a statutory duty for applicants, and the Planning Act 2008 (PA2008) requires for it to be carried out in a certain manner and to a certain standard. Where any person feels that an applicant?s pre-application consultation was inadequately carried out, they should seek resolution by approaching the applicant in the first instance. Where dissatisfaction remains, the appropriate mechanism is to make a complaint to the relevant local authority (who can consider this complaint as part of their representation to the Secretary of State on the adequacy of consultation), or to the Secretary of State (via the Inspectorate). Any complaint should be made promptly following the close of pre-application consultation to ensure that it was received no later than the point at which an application is submitted to the Planning Inspectorate. In all cases, the final decision as to whether pre-application consultation was adequately carried out rests with the Secretary of State.

As you are likely aware, on 19 September 2014 the Planning Inspectorate (on behalf of the Secretary of State) made its decision that the application by Roxhill (Kegworth) Ltd was of a satisfactory standard to proceed to be examined. The period within which complaints about pre-application consultation could be made and considered by the Inspectorate as part of its acceptance decision has therefore elapsed. Local authorities were invited to make representations to the Inspectorate concerning the adequacy of the applicant?s pre-application consultation, and any complaints made to them should have been taken into account. Those representations are available to view by clicking the following link:

http://infrastructure.planningportal.gov.uk/projects/east-midlands/east-midlands-gateway-rail-freight-interchange/?ipcsection=docs&stage=2&filter=Adequacy+of+Consultation

On submission of the application the Inspectorate applied the associated legal tests (under s55 PA2008) to the application documentation, including the consultation evidence provided by the applicant. The Inspectorate decided that the applicant?s pre-application consultation had been of a satisfactory standard, and its commentary and conclusions are available to be read in the ?Acceptance of Applications Checklist?:

http://infrastructure.planningportal.gov.uk/wp-content/ipc/uploads/projects/TR050002/2.%20Post-Submission/Procedural%20Decisions/140919%20TR050002_Section_55_Acceptance_of_Applications_Checklist.pdf

Importantly, the Inspectorate?s decision to accept the application to be examined did not comprise any consideration of the merits of the application. These issues will be tested in detail by an appointed Examining Authority at the appropriate time.

The examination of the application cannot commence until a ?relevant representations? period has elapsed; a minimum period of 28 days within which anybody can register to become and ?interested party?, enabling them to make written and oral representations about the application throughout the six month examination period.

The applicant advertised the acceptance of the application today (26 September 2014), and the relevant representations period for the application period opened concurrently. In order for the comments comprised within your email to be considered by an Examining Authority, once appointed, I must request that you register as an interested party as described above. The comments comprised within your email concerning the merits of the application should be repeated on the appropriate prescribed form. The form is available by clicking the following link:

http://infrastructure.planningportal.gov.uk/projects/east-midlands/east-midlands-gateway-rail-freight-interchange/

Please be aware that the deadline for making a relevant representation is 3 November 2014. For more information on how to register as an interested party please read the Inspectorate?s associated advice note (Advice note 8.3: How to register and become an interested part in an examination), available here:

http://infrastructure.planningportal.gov.uk/legislation-and-advice/advice-notes/

The Inspectorate has also produced a short film explaining the process from end-to-end, available here:

http://infrastructure.planningportal.gov.uk/application-process/the-process/