How many remember Sir Rog announcing "planes will be flying from Manston by the end of 2016" but then he is wasted as a MP he should be a comedian.
Here is the list of outstanding requirements
1. a rebuttal to the Avia report
In October 2016 the report by AVIA, commissioned at a cost of £50K by TDC, was published. Immediately Riveroak said they would provide a full rebuttal, since then Riveroak has been strangely silent and now the AVIA report has been used to feed into the proposed Local plan which has changed the former airport to a mixed use site.
2. A public consultation
We have had a mickey mouse consultation led by airport supporters which managed to lose any feedback forms from people who think a cargo hub is wrong. But until 7 and 3 are completed there is no chance of a proper consultation.
3. An environment report
A fundamental prerequisite of a Public Consultation is a full Environmental report which should look at the affect on the people living under the flight path of a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project with at least 10000 aircraft movements a year.
4. a DCO application
Needless to say this will be the final hurdle however we are a very long way from getting the application submitted.
5. A S53 application to access the land
On the 19th of December after taking 6 months the Planning Inspectorate have granted access to the site. Needless to say the pro airport supporters are ecstatic however in their normal hectoring style Riveroak decided to apply for 24/7/365 access. In other words they wanted unfettered access to the airport for a year. Now I wonder what would be reasonable access to land you don't own, have no rights to access, and ultimately you want to legally steal from the owners?
SHP made this statement:
“The DCO process requires various surveys to be carried out on the land. As part of that process, Stone Hill Park were approached about allowing access, but were concerned at the scope of the entry to our land that RiverOak sought in pursuing this.
“We felt RiverOak’s effective request for entry to our land 365 days a year, 24 hours a day, went beyond the realm of reasonable requests and sought to ensure that if access was granted, it was under strict conditions.
“We are pleased with the conditions the Planning Inspectorate has placed on this access and as a result we will accept the decision rather than appeal.
“We are satisfied the Planning Inspectorate has performed the process with integrity and to a very high standard and now intend to assist RiverOak in accessing our site to carry out these environmental tests.
“Regardless of this decision, our view remains that an airport on this site is unviable and attempts to obtain the land by way of a Development Consent Order will fail – just as attempts to obtain it through a Compulsory Purchase Order failed.”
When asked what the conditions imposed were they said:
"Hi Barry, they predominantly deal with the times and dates that RO can access the site and what tasks can be carried out. The conditions have been shared with RO and SHP. Hopefully they will also be published on the PI website in due course."
Chris Wells responded as follows
"I have been told that section 53 access to the Manston Airport site has been granted by the Secretary of State, although as yet no formal confirmation has appeared.
"I am not surprised by this news, as
the early stages of any pre application DCO process concentrate on the
potential capacity of the site, to understand if what is being
considered is 'a distinct project of real substance genuinely requiring
entry onto the land'.
"The capacity of the potential applicant to undertake the proposed project, and its value to be assessed as a nationally significant infrastructure project, comes later. And even with the best of Christmas spirit in mind, it is within the basics of proving finance and business planning that Riveroak have, to date, been found wanting.
We shall all see how things now develop in the New Year."
Read more at http://www.kentlive.news/stone-hill-park-responds-to-government-order-to-allow-riveroak-access-to-manston-airport/story-30001784-detail/story.html#oICuKPBPYZSzbWm4.99
"The capacity of the potential applicant to undertake the proposed project, and its value to be assessed as a nationally significant infrastructure project, comes later. And even with the best of Christmas spirit in mind, it is within the basics of proving finance and business planning that Riveroak have, to date, been found wanting.
We shall all see how things now develop in the New Year."
Read more at http://www.kentlive.news/stone-hill-park-responds-to-government-order-to-allow-riveroak-access-to-manston-airport/story-30001784-detail/story.html#oICuKPBPYZSzbWm4.99
6. A answer to the screenshot question from Robo King.
7. No work with TDC on a "Statement of Community Consultation"
"Before
formally consulting people living in the vicinity of the project, the developer
will prepare a Statement of Community Consultation (SOCC), having first
consulted relevant local authorities about what it should contain. The SOCC
details the consultation the developer intends to undertake with the local
community about their project. The developer is then required to carry out
their consultation with the local community as set out in the SOCC.The
developer is required to publish a notice stating where and when the SOCC can
be inspected. If you are not satisfied with the developer’s consultation
process you should inform the developer about your concerns as soon as possible
and give them an opportunity to respond"
Needless to say despite running an unofficial consultation Riveroak have not been in touch with TDC planning nor indeed KCC planning to formulate their SOCC but then that is hardly surprising given as they took 6 months to gain access to Manston.
Now there was me thinking they had the most experienced DCO team ever
Sorry to lower the tone on this blog but have just read the comments on SmAa and Manston loudhailer slagging each other off. What a bunch of hypocrites, especially Smee, Churcher and Dan Light aka Danny Skeedale, James Clark. They all deserve each other and adios to the campaign.
ReplyDeleteAs an insider at SMAA I'm quite worried with the information being kept from the public by our group.Hopefully Mr Churcher would get that information out and the trust that has been placed with certain people can be explained.
DeleteWhat information do you think the members of SMAa cannot see. This blog tries to get info out, but if they don't want to read it then what else can you do?
DeleteSome at SMAA have seen what's happening with RO and have been kept out the loop.Its quite worrisome as to why Roger Gale seems to dictate the pace to others in the group.
DeleteWould that be the DCO team that has never failed'Ever'.There's always a first time and with Mr Freudmanns track record of failure and his involvement this should tick the box for their first loss in the DCO business.
ReplyDeleteYes that is indeed the undefeated DCO team. Now taking forward an idea for an economically unviable airport which would fill the air with lung irritant particulates in the area with highest lung disease rate in UK.
DeleteThe council has had a statutory duty since 2003 to tell its area about environmental threats to health. They never bothered with that. So they did not tell Manston Airport Consultative Cttee, the people or the Thanet Clinical Commissioning Group (Who National Planning now insist is involved in the RO consultation BTW)
Sir Rog remains confident.
Yes and trying to limit the consultation group and the people entitled to compensation if you read the minutes of the last pins meeting.
ReplyDelete