Thursday, 26 May 2016

And then there was one

Well it seems Riveroak are the only player left in the long running Manston saga. Story from the Thanet Gazette
"Thanet council is expected to take no further action in looking for an indemnity partner for the compulsory purchase of Manston airport - but has claimed two groups are interested in buying the site.
Thanet council carried out a soft market testing exercise to seek interest for a CPO partner after American firm RiverOak was rejected by the authority for a second time in October.
A Prior Information Notice calling for expressions of interest was opened on Friday, January 15.
Five were received by the deadline of February 9.
The interested parties were then given until February 12 to respond to a follow-up questionnaire.
Three of these were deemed valid.
But Thanet council did receive interest from other parties, prompted by the CPO soft market testing process.
One party is approaching the current owners, Stone Hill Park, to negotiate a purchase and so did not participate in the soft market testing process.
Thanet council says that group is backed by sovereign wealth funds and potentially public sector pension funds and is considering investing up to £150million. This would be subject to a feasibility study showing that investment in the airport makes economic sense.
Another party also wanted to express interest in acquiring the site and was also directed to talk to Stone Hill Park bosses
In a report due to go to Cabinet members on June 16 Director of Corporate Governance Tim Howes states: "Based on the assessment one can draw the conclusions that in terms of the key lines of enquiry, the market cannot deliver on the council's requirements; there is no established market which is able to deliver, or an adequate number of operators; the market has no capacity to deliver the requirements and there is no cost or other benefits in taking this matter further."

Mr Howes recommends Thanet council: "take no further action in respect of the interested parties."

Council leader Chris Wells said: "The sovereign wealth fund group came to us through contact with SuMA (Supporters of Manston Airport) and that has been a very interesting development and one that we will continue to pursue - but not in the context of a CPO which they are not interested in.
"East Kent Chamber of Commerce have also been involved in engaging this potential new investor and the chamber and ourselves continue to engage with those who would make investments in Thanet."
Cllr Wells said the outcome would be down to market negotiations between the would-be investor and Stone Hill Park.
So what will it cost the one single investor who thinks they might invest up to £150M. Well 2500 houses planned at a cost of £200K each equates to £500M potential and that's a conservative estimate. So ask yourself reader would you sell out?
So how is the DCO going with Riveroak. The continue to discuss matters with the Planning Authority and little notes keep popping up from the PA. The latest is here (link to latest note)

So far so good
So we still have the terrible idea of at least 12000 aircraft movements including nightflights over this area 
So it seems that the LEGAL owners of Manston (Stone Hill Park) have refused to let Riveroak in. I wonder why? Maybe its to do with their failure to tell anyone how much of the land they want to steal.
RiverOak's lawyers, BDB submitted a 6(1)(b) notification as specified in Regulation 6(3) of the Infrastructure Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2009, but it was missing a required piece of information. (* a red lined map of the area )
This is what regulation 6 of those regulations require to be submitted when a notification is made regarding an EIA, such as the notification submitted by BDB on behalf of RiverOak.

(3) A request or notification under paragraph (1) must be accompanied by—

(a)a plan sufficient to identify the land;

(b)a brief description of the nature and purpose of the development and of its possible effects on the environment;

(c)such other information or representations as the person making the request may wish to provide or make.
The missing information was the area to be covered by the DCO.

Seems like RO aren't keen on disclosing which bit of land they want to compulsorily purchase. Is it because they don't know (which would be amazing after 2 years)? Or are they trying to hide something?
My guess is they don't want to disclose the red lined plan showing which land they want to include in the DCO. Could it include the housing behind Jentex? Or the cottages close to Helicharter? That would be contentious.
(Thanks for the clarification Marie)
 Michael Child poses the following point
"The Planning inspectorate have said in their advice that it is important that interested parties consult with RiverOak now i.e. in this pre statutory consultation stage, because the statutory consultation is front loaded.
I take this to mean that unless the content of the statutory consultation is decided by all of the interested parties then it is unlikely to be an effective part of the DCO. However RiverOak so far don’t seem to have answered any correspondence from interested parties."
Personally I, and many others, seriously thing Riveroak are attempting to make their consultation as difficult as humanly possible for any one to complain about what they are up to. 3 meetings with Parish Councils poorly advertised and no opportunity to give and accept feedback. A website that doesn't respond to any comments. Riveroak being based in the US of A not answering emails. No UK based  point of contact. It really is a nonsense.
So how are the pro airport people taking it. Funny you should ask
Dot I have some bad news for you and, of course, a correction. Firstly I am real unfortunately for you and I take exception to your scurrilousness lies. How very dare you talk about me behind my back especially when you dislike me talking about you. Now the correction: You have this arse about face your friends and colleagues are the ones threatening to shoot Gloag and do nothing else but make nasty vicious comments about anyone not pro airport including me, Marie and Robert Bird. So just imagine if you and your friends hadn't made those threatening comments we would have nothing to talk about.
 I do agree Dot SMA are "petty and ridiculous". Just so you understand you continue to make nasty comments about me and I will give you the publicity you richly deserve.
To Continue
SMA's fall out continues
Yes Dot you are viewed as the mouthpiece of Riveroak, You are hostile to anyone not toeing your party line. You are also nasty, vindictive and out of control.
Oh and putting more pressure on TDC planning to get your petty, vile and unneeded view across is again why the normal people of this world dislike SMA so much.


  1. Omg Dot poor you with this nasty itch. I hope you haven't caught 'Crabs'.

    1. With Dot's detective skills it is doubtful she could catch a cold

    2. The SUMA 100 years of Manston event is priceless. What next 100 years of Woolworths. It doesn't exist any more...

    3. I'm waiting for Littlebourne's doctor of fabulous figures to assert it's 1,000 years of Manston.

    4. Isn't he too exhausted from answering emails to MPs ? Maybe he is working on the Manston Millenium celebration in an exhausted state. I heard he plans a pre history pageant featuring good sport Roger Gale. Rodge will be wearing a Jurassic outfit of a contorted creature. A bent dinosaur.

    5. Anyone at the event?

    6. Seven million, according to the Littlebourne doctor.

  2. If the consultations are not held properly this will enable a challenge to be made against the DCO. However it looks very unlikely that the DCO will now be needed as the owners are considering the offer from the Soverign Wealth Fund and others. Barry as for value I'm not sure your numbers are right as it's not the number of houses times the cost that SHP will sell the site for but the number of houses times the profit to be made on each house isn't it ?

    1. According to news media the Sovereign fund is "considering investing £150M" This is far below what would be needed for infrastructure costs and purchase of the site. Why would any one sell when you can make much more from developing 800 acres?

    2. Yes Barry plus with Sovereign Wealth Funding there should have to be security checks to establish who would be acquiring a strategic asset in uk or a binding contract to demolish it as an airport.

  3. The land belongs to British owners with a very strong business plan which keeps the government happy;houses,and will keep local people happy;Jobs and open spaces for all plus some afordable homes for proveable locals.RiverOak&co and the only MP who is fighting tooth&nail to reinstate a proven failed airport! Will smother the land with properties and sit back laughing at how they tricked their way into nicking the land.When all fails for RO and gang it will be the go to the Law courts route.

  4. Dear Cllr Wells

    You have statutory duties

    "The Council has duties under the Environmental Protection Act 1990 and Public Health
    Act 1984-to protect public health and the Environmental Information Regulations- to make
    information publicly available”.

    So please respond to my previous emails re Risk and Environmental Impact study related to Manston and assessment of hazard of airborne particulates.

    Thank you Richard Card

    1. I do hope you won't think this mischief making. But today I emailed RO solicitors as part of consultation and asked them to consider compelling TDC in the above duties by judicial review seeking costs and damages on behalf of their client.

    2. I see in Gazette that RO are now saying "Historical environment" will feature in their environmental impact assessment. If they find out what went on at Thor perhaps they'll drop a line to Chilcott.

      A very surprising development this morning. A letter from Kent Chief constable. Does this mean he is no longer refusing to answer me ? He is having a word with his legal services dept. Never one to miss an opportunity I replied with further information for him to note.

  5. And then there was one,has now become 'None'RivernoOaktrees will be going down the compo route I can feel it in my bones,I wonder what role sir Roger Gale MP will be playing on that route?.HD.

    1. HD Their solicitors have still not replied to me. Roger Gale has still kept silent I have heard nothing further since his email last months "Actionable and libellous" about what I had written to RO solicitors.

      This week our 39 year old daughter was diagnosed out of the blue with COPD. Yet another.

      The NHS outreach a while back found COPD in 1 in 7 tested at Westwood Cross.

      IMO it would be an extraordinary call if Planning Inspoectorate let them get away without expert inquiry into the air and water contamination history. To assess if Thanet has an increased vulnerability to airport airborne lung irritants.

      The security issue would have to be addressed I think in the Sovereign Wealth Fund interest as it would in RO secret investor application.

      But as you say I think RO may well consider an action against TDC for the compo based on proceeding in good faith while TDC like snake oil salesmen oversold the Section 106 agreement.

      TDC can be compelled by judicial review to address the history of failing to inform public and failing in their public health duty.

      What used to be called an action for mandamus. An order of the court compelling them in their duty.

      Wells has still not answered on that. Iris Johnston (much of the history was on her watch) has not answered.

      If you put your people on to a Judicial Review application I think you would be half way to killing RO bid off. IF it can be established that RO knew the flaky nature of the 106 you would kill their case for compo too.

    2. Riveroaks compo case has many twists and turns all leading to failure!They think all is in hand,they've looked outside the box but missed the sizes,Riveroak and their champions could very well end up the ones in the dock.
      Richard out of interest whot symptoms did your daughter show?
      Regards.Humpty Dumpty.

  6. Apparently somone is suing the London mayor on grounds that airport driven pollution was responsible for the asthma attack that killed her child. Another case is being taken at the European level. Perhaps RO should be made aware.

  7. RivernoOaktrees's man sir Roger Gale would be aware both in the UK and in Europe as he travels to Europe so I guess THEY know.This would be kept quite by gale to the general public as he's a master at not mentioning problematic Truthful facts!

  8. I see that Tony Freudman has favoured Michael Child with a reply. mmmmmmm