• ℹ️ Heads up...

    This is a popular topic that is fast moving Guest - before posting, please ensure that you check out the first post in the topic for a quick reminder of guidelines, and importantly a summary of the known facts and information so far. Thanks.

London Entertainment Resort: All Discussion

I wouldn’t be too worried about opposition. With any huge infrastructure project of this type, there will be plenty of people who don’t support it, and there will be plenty of backlash.

I seem to remember London Resort saying that 60% of the locals questioned during the consultations last year approved of the project. I know that doesn’t sound too high on the face of it, but history tells us that projects like this are often quite polarising, or even flat-out hated by locals in some cases.

Take Disneyland Paris, the most common comparison to this project, for instance; I’d wager the approval rating for that among the French was far, far lower than 60% when it was being built. A large proportion of the French public were actively outraged at the prospect of DLP being built, and the French press absolutely slaughtered it, yet it still got built. The press stories about the London Resort in Britain are far more positive in tone than the similar stories about DLP in France apparently were when that project was announced.

Even in Britain, look at something like HS2. That project is very polarising indeed, and has attracted a phenomenal amount of opposition, yet it’s still being built. I believe construction started on HS2 fairly recently, did it not?
 
I agree that the government isn't going to get voted out over the London Resort. I can't actually think of anything that would get this goverment voted out. If anyone thinks of something, let me know.
 
Funcone said:
I agree that the government isn't going to get voted out over the London Resort. I can't actually think of anything that would get this goverment voted out. If anyone thinks of something, let me know.
Click to expand...
I meant more in terms of councils should have worded it better. This government is never going to get voted out about something like this.
 
Matt N said:
I wouldn’t be too worried about opposition. With any huge infrastructure project of this type, there will be plenty of people who don’t support it, and there will be plenty of backlash.

I seem to remember London Resort saying that 60% of the locals questioned during the consultations last year approved of the project. I know that doesn’t sound too high on the face of it, but history tells us that projects like this are often quite polarising, or even flat-out hated by locals in some cases.

Take Disneyland Paris, the most common comparison to this project, for instance; I’d wager the approval rating for that among the French was far, far lower than 60% when it was being built. A large proportion of the French public were actively outraged at the prospect of DLP being built, and the French press absolutely slaughtered it, yet it still got built. The press stories about the London Resort in Britain are far more positive in tone than the similar stories about DLP in France apparently were when that project was announced.

Even in Britain, look at something like HS2. That project is very polarising indeed, and has attracted a phenomenal amount of opposition, yet it’s still being built. I believe construction started on HS2 fairly recently, did it not?
Click to expand...

Disneyland Paris and the opposition from the French was a very difference beast to this. They are fiercely protective over their culture, and Disney had to go to great lengths to appease them (The Imagineering Story touches on this, and the upcoming Disney+ episode of Behind the Attraction likely will too). After all, France only got their first McDonalds in Paris in 1984, and a Starbucks in 2004! The concerns seen from the likes of HS2 are for ecological things like local woodland being destroyed, or for house prices being heavily affected by the line being so close to homes. Likewise with London Resort, the opposition is predominately for things like ecological or traffic impact.

In terms of the 60% of people being in favour, planning decisions are not based on the number of people objecting, being in favour of it or from positive press stories. Those figures are a psychological factor to try and persuade various planning bodies, but there's much more at play. It could take just one person came up with compelling reasons and evidence for a refusal, and the project could be substantially set back or even refused outright. That's why we're seeing such a strong kickback from London Resort about the SSSI designation. It's a relatively small number of people who have had a hand in granting it, but London Resort know that it has a capability of either substantially reducing the scale of this project or outright killing it entirely. HS2 is a true infrastructure project (I've talked about how London Resort is a push for that designation in the past), which has gone ahead despite a substantial number of people being against it. On the flip side, strong public support for London Resort could still mean permission could be refused.

On the HS2 front again, although construction is progressing its already subject to astronomical cost increases, delays and arguments being made for it to be cancelled already. Which is another similar problem London Resort will no doubt face even if they did eventually get their planning permission.
 
The vast majority of jobs this place would potentially create will be at the lower end of the scale. Guest services, hotel and park attendants, waiters etc. Of course there will be some higher salaried roles too but the vast majority of salaries at this site won't support a family in that area of the county. You can't afford to get a house and raise a family on minimum wage or just above minimum wage jobs in the South East of England. It will be students and young people primarily working those roles just like they do all over the world in similar resorts.
 
It would appear that the Resort is now actively seeking suppliers: https://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=https://londonresort.info/suppliers&h=AT2L7cHH1dvAeKKPfiW5kxj4HAkfwvJJM4k3Ox43YyfV-2iDdVcQ0v57O4r3TeNLjqQ1zVqfpG0O4fFMQRVIPc-jqCjo7Y0gEteiVPWai6585O4XQThjFLYki9EjRSw&s=1

A fairly promising development, don’t you think?

In other news, I had my first Summer Newsletter from the Resort team today (before you ask, I signed up for updates on the website), and it talked about how they’re recruiting suppliers, as well as how they’re taking a few additional months to revise the proposal. It also talked a bit about Base Camp, the new dinosaur area announced earlier this year.

It all sounds fairly exciting, and I hope the Resort team can overcome these last hurdles and finally get this thing going! They have an investor on board, so let’s hope they’re able to simply work around the SSSI designation and redraw the Resort accordingly in order to get development steaming ahead!
 
Away from the (mysteriously well timed) announcement that they're asking for supplier registrations, the planning inspectorate has today published a letter sent to London Resort which basically tells it to get its house in order. There's a lot of lengthy explanation in there, but from what I can surmise, they're basically wanting London Resort to:

  • Explain if they'll have sufficient, current environmental information ready for examination no later than January. The important word here is current, see below for the reasons why this is emphasised as I have a feeling it's not been updated for some time.
  • Set out whether all of their coming additions/changes constitute a material change to the application (the bit Merlin and BALPPA have complained about)
  • Amend their monthly updates to identify and clearly explain what the delays to document preparation and consultation are. This is because a lot of their documents are less than 20% complete. They've also asked why some consultees haven't been consulted as often as LRH said they would. Notably, organisations such as Natural England and the Environment Agency haven't been consulted since June 2021 or earlier, despite being told the update frequency would be monthly or less.
  • Most importantly, the Planning Inspectorate have asked LRH to revisit its plan not to consult on further non environmental impact assessment documents. They have also asked that they consider that the Draft Development Consent Order be updated and submitted as they risk constituting a material change (again another Melin/BALPPA complaint)
It seems despite the complaints saying otherwise from LRH, the Planning Inspectorate firmly believe Merlin have a point.
 
Just read some of the comments on page 1 from Oct 2012 and even back then they said they were 3 years into the planning and people were saying it wouldn’t happen.
The Spanish project at least got flags put up.
 
There is no chance these clowns are going to be able to build a large entertainment resort, no chance.

They cannot even manage themselves properly when it comes to crossing the T's and dotting the I's with some of the core, basic fundamentals of getting through the red tape. Something every developer has to do in some form or another.

If they cannot complete this relatively basic step, how the hell are they going to get a resort built, which is far far more complex in the management and planning, than these steps.

Talk about trying to run before you can walk. Well, at least they have held true in one thing, providing entertainment. As this is quickly turning into a circus.
 
It comes to something when even the planning inspectorate thinks they're living in La La loo loo land. The only things I can't understand is, why do they keep dragging this on when it's clearly never going to happen? I'd imagine someone somewhere has money that they can't afford to loose tied up in it so just holds on to that 0.0001% chance out of desperation
 
Out of interest, does this pre-procurement phase cover suppliers of more interesting, major things, like rides & theming (so we could be seeing ride manufacturers registering their interest, for instance), or the suppliers of more minor things, like food suppliers and merchandise suppliers? Or would it be both?
 
Matt N said:
Out of interest, does this pre-procurement phase cover suppliers of more interesting, major things, like rides & theming (so we could be seeing ride manufacturers registering their interest, for instance), or the suppliers of more minor things, like food suppliers and merchandise suppliers? Or would it be both?
Click to expand...

There's no specification whatsoever. The current "pre-procurement phase" is basically just saying "if you think you can sell us something, let us know and we'll stick you on a list". No one knows what contracts are available because there simply isn't any at the moment, it's why the whole thing isn't really movement on the project itself, but more another thing to keep things ticking over in the press as it generates a few more articles.
 
In terms of things that might signal more major progress; what sort of stuff should I be looking for? What sort of stuff would actually signal major progress that makes a difference to the project’s chances of happening?

I still believe there’s a decent chance of something materialising here myself; investment is now seemingly on board, and the project’s arguably been rolling on for too long for something not to happen with it. Whether it ends up being a theme park on the scale they’re saying is another matter entirely, but I am cautiously optimistic given how far it’s progressed in the last year! (for instance, the GDO application finally went in in December 2020!)
 
Last edited:
Matt N said:
In terms of things that might signal more major progress; what sort of stuff should I be looking for?
Click to expand...

Ultimately you're not going anything about contracts being out to tender until the planning process is sorted, actual suppliers are way down the line at present. What you need to look out for next is:
  • The Planning Inspectorate making a decision on whether LRH need to resubmit their application for consulation again en masse
  • LRH to submit the missing documents which the Planning Inspectorate have asked for
  • News on actual funding for the resort - and I'm talking about actual names and confirmed amounts of funding, not just "we have a group of investors but we're not revealing who". Remember, unless they can prove the funding is in place then they cannot progress with the compulsory purchase orders for the land.
 
Was just scrolling the Chrome news feed and saw a post from the Derby Telegraph about a new dinosaur theme park. So I clicked the link and started reading. I got halfway in before it said "part of the London Resort, being built in Kent..." :mad:

I swear these papers are just trolling us now! Don't call it a dinosaur theme park if its not a park solely themed to dinosaurs. Don't write like it's under construction when it hasn't even started. And Don't keep writing non-storys about the London Resort when it's been in development limbo for over 10 years!
 
Tim said:
Was just scrolling the Chrome news feed and saw a post from the Derby Telegraph about a new dinosaur theme park. So I clicked the link and started reading. I got halfway in before it said "part of the London Resort, being built in Kent..." :mad:

I swear these papers are just trolling us now! Don't call it a dinosaur theme park if its not a park solely themed to dinosaurs. Don't write like it's under construction when it hasn't even started. And Don't keep writing non-storys about the London Resort when it's been in development limbo for over 10 years!
Click to expand...

As long as they keep getting engagement which is easily 10 times more than their next most popular article recently, and 50 times more than the vast majority of their content they're gonna keep going I'm afraid. Reach Plc want those clicks, and London Resort stuff is the easiest way of getting it.

download.png
 
Alas I know why they do it.

But it's clickbate news like this which is why I don't tend to read news articles anymore. In the long term it can't be good for these papers if people get frustrated and stop reading.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top