St Lawrence in 1946 another Manston update

A hard days work today, most of it spent filling in forms 

While one of the people who works here in the bookshop was carefully scanning and turning this little guide into a reprint I took a few mobile phone pictures of pages for the blog

  

I suppose we will have it in print later in the week

I think the idea here is to produce a few booklets in the under £3 ballpark that one local person can send to another instead of a greetings card

something like this one we did the other day which I posted about then

A couple of 1940s pics from the north of the island to equal things up.

RiveOak have resubmitted their DCO, hard to know what to make of this as one would have assumed some sort of further consultation would have been essential.

"RSP’s Manston Airport Development Consent Order application is resubmitted
Published on July 16th, 2018

RiverOak Strategic Partners (RSP) is today (16 July 2018) re-submitting its application for a Development Consent Order (DCO) in which it seeks development consent and compulsory acquisition powers over the Manston Airport site. RSP’s plan for Manston envisages the airport as a major international cargo hub, as well as offering passenger flights.

The DCO application was originally submitted to the government Planning Inspectorate (PINS) at the beginning of April. However, it was withdrawn in early May to satisfy PINS’ requests for further information about certain parts of the application. These related to funding, to the categorisation of the project as being of national significance, and to certain aspects of the supporting environmental statements.

George Yerrall, a director of RiverOak Strategic Partners, said: “The original DCO application, which was submitted in early April, and which ran to 11,000 pages, was the culmination of twenty-seven months of intensive work on the part of the RSP team and our professional consultants. This included three separate consultation exercises as well as a complex planning appeal. We were therefore naturally disappointed to be informed by PINS that, in their view, the application fell short in certain respects. Nevertheless, we have taken up all the points raised by PINS and, working with our full team, we have used the past nine weeks to provide full and comprehensive responses to those points. We have also taken the opportunity to clarify the situation in relation to the two museums. We are promising to safeguard their position, as before, but have now made it clear that any future development consent relating to either museum would be a matter for Thanet District Council, rather than PINS.

“The submission sent to PINS today incorporates all that additional work and we believe that the documentation as amended is sufficient to justify the DCO application being allowed to move to the next stage.”

here is the link to the books we put out today 

I aim to add a bit more to this post if I get time

Only a few Ramsgate photos this evening this is the link to them

I don't really know what to make of the Manston DCO application the pins website makes it look as though pins are unaware of the resubmission

This link takes you to the post about the DCO withdrawal that links to the pins not explaining why it was withdrawn  

below - read from the bottom up are my emails about this

From: manston
To: michaelchild
CC: manstonconsultation
Sent: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 11:36
Subject: RE: Manston DCO

Dear Mr Child

Thank you for your email.

RiverOak Strategic Partners recently held a meeting with the Planning Inspectorate to clarify this, and more information will be made publically available in the application documents as part of our resubmission. 

Kind regards,

Sam

RiverOak Strategic Partners

Manston Airport consultation team

From: michaelchild@aol.com [mailto:michaelchild@aol.com]
Sent: 25 June 2018 15:40
To: manston@communityrelations.co.uk; manstonconsultation@bdb-law.co.uk
Subject: Fwd: Manston DCO

Hi Manston DCO team

Can you give me an update on the situation with the DCO?

I asked pins various questions about the meeting note on their website and the told me to ask you instead. my main question was:-

“The largest figure mentioned in the advice note is 83,222 ATMs, is this meant to be an annual figure? If it is it would mean 228 ATMs a day and wouldn’t seem viable given the infrastructure, history or the environmental implications?”

and pins answer was:-

83,222 ATMs is an annual figure. Please contact the Applicant directly for more information on matters relating to the design and operational capability of its Proposed Development. The Planning Inspectorate cannot prejudge what any future resubmission may comprise.

The rest are below (at the bottom) and I would appreciate your answers to what you can.

-----Original Message-----
From: Manston Airport <ManstonAirport@pins.gsi.gov.uk>
To: michaelchild <michaelchild@aol.com>
Sent: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 17:22
Subject: RE: Manston DCO

Dear Mr Child

Thank you for your email.

“Now the application has been withdrawn does this mean that it should be seen as at the pre application stage again?”

If an application is withdrawn at the Acceptance stage, and the Applicant clearly states its intention to resubmit at some time in the future, the project stage is moved back to ‘Pre-application’. This is indicated on the project status bar located on the top right of the Manston Airport project webpage.

“If so does this mean that as a person who would be affected by the development I should be maintaining a dialogue with both pins and with the applicant, or should I view the application as over until such time as the applicant starts the application again with a revised PEIR and consultation?”

Until an application is resubmitted, the Applicant should be your first point of contact. It will be for the Applicant to take a view about whether any further consultation and/ or revised documentation will be required before the application is resubmitted.

“Did pins receive an application fee as part of the application process that stopped just before the deadline?”

The Acceptance fee (£6,939) was paid by the Applicant, and is non-refundable. Any resubmitted application will be a new application for the purposes of the Regulations, and will attract a second Acceptance fee.

“The largest figure mentioned in the advice note is 83,222 ATMs, is this meant to be an annual figure? If it is it would mean 228 ATMs a day and wouldn’t seem viable given the infrastructure, history or the environmental implications.”

83,222 ATMs is an annual figure. Please contact the Applicant directly for more information on matters relating to the design and operational capability of its Proposed Development. The Planning Inspectorate cannot prejudge what any future resubmission may comprise.

“With the existing freight capabilities of the airport I am assuming that a baseline of the previous CAA licence which I think was in 23,000 ATMs ballpark would be a significant factor, could you please confirm that this figure is approximately right?”

The Planning Inspectorate does not hold this information. Please contact the former licence holder.

Kind regards

James

Manston Airport Case Team

Temple Quay House, Temple Quay, Bristol BS1 6PN
Helpline: 0303 444 5000
Email: ManstonAirport@pins.gsi.gov.uk

Web: https://infrastructure.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/ (National Infrastructure Planning)

Web: www.gov.uk/government/organisations/planning-inspectorate (The Planning Inspectorate)

Twitter: @PINSgov

This communication does not constitute legal advice.
Please view our Privacy Notice before sending information to the Planning Inspectorate.

From: michaelchild@aol.com [mailto:michaelchild@aol.com]
Sent: 08 June 2018 13:03
To: Manston Airport
Subject: Manston DCO

Hi Manston DCO team at pins

Could you kindly clarify the situation with some aspects of the RSP DCO for me, or failing that tell me who I should be asking?

Now the application has been withdrawn does this mean that it should be seen as at the pre application stage again?

If so does this mean that as a person who would be affected by the development I should be maintaining a diaogue with both pins and with the applicant, or should I view the application as over until such time as the applicant starts the application again with a revised PEIR and consultation?

Did pins receive an application fee as part of the application process that stopped just before the deadline?

I have read the pins advice note Meeting Update TR020002 and although I would doubt I properly understood it all and I am having considerable difficulty the ATM figures in it.

My understanding both from the application as described on the pins website “The upgrade and reopening of Manston Airport primarily as a cargo airport, with some passenger services, with a capacity of at least 12,000 air cargo movements per year.” and from attending the three RSP consultations, communicating with the applicant and with pins by email I formed the impression that is that something in the 12,000 ATMs ball park is what the project intended and not an expansion of the previous capacity. Am I mistaken in this assumption?

The largest figure mentioned in the advice note is 83,222 ATMs, is this meant to be an annual figure? If it is it would mean 228 ATMs a day and wouldn’t seem viable given the infrastructure, history or the environmental implications.

I can see that pins main concern at this point would be the legal aspects of acceptance, but having the general impression of around 12,000 ATMs, which seems to be the sort of ballpark area that everyone I have discussed the project with assumed up until now. I am a bit concerned that the consultation process thus far was less informative than I had assumed.  

There is a sense in all of this that while pins can’t respond to questions about the project, you may consider commenting about what the project actually is. In terms of is it an intersection joining 2 major roads or 16?

There is also a sense in which pins seem to be instead of saying the project isn’t NSIP compliant, possibly by a factor of 8 times the project size, instead of rejecting the project pins appear to be trying unreasonably hard to help the applicant above and beyond the interested and affected parties.

With the existing freight capabilities of the airport I am assuming that a baseline of the previous CAA licence which I think was in 23,000 ATMs ballpark would be a significant factor, could you please confirm that this figure is approximately right?

Please appreciate in this instance I am not so much trying to ask pins if the figures arranged in some way make the project a NSIP but to gather the information to enable me to ask either pins or the applicant the right questions. One of which is is the project still seen as ongoing and front loaded?

Best regards Michael
http://michaelsbookshop.blogspot.co.uk/ Pictures of books going out on the shelves in my bookshop

http://thanetonline.blogspot.co.uk/ My general pictures and writing 

Due to the nature of Clown Computing this email has been sent to you from some sort of fruit, it may make you more comfortable to know the following:- If it makes sense, it was sent by my PineApple Device, which has an ordinary keyboard. If it contains random wrong words, it was sent by my RaspBerry Device, which has predictive text and a small screen that I can’t always see properly. If it makes no sense whatsoever, it was sent by my new BaNana Device, with which I develop the persona of a chimpanzee and hit keys randomly hoping it will produce the works of Shakespeare, or at least something coherent.