LONG LANE DATA CENTRE — EVIDENCE REQUEST TEMPLATE

Template note: This is a request to the project team. It is not a submission to RBWM and does not create a statutory obligation to answer each question. Adapt it to your concerns, send it yourself and keep a copy. Raise unresolved planning concerns with RBWM during the formal application consultation.

Subject: Long Lane Data Centre — request for supporting evidence and consultation information

Dear consultation team,

I am writing in response to the current consultation and would like further information about the economic case for Long Lane Data Centre and its relationship with neighbouring homes, particularly Astoria Park. Please record this submission as part of the consultation.

Your project page refers to £750 million of investment and approximately 75 permanent operational and support jobs. Your planning page states that an Economic and Community Benefits Report will be published:
https://www.longlanedatacentre.com/project
https://www.longlanedatacentre.com/planning

Please provide the following information so residents can assess these claims and understand the development’s benefits and effects.

ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT AND EMPLOYMENT

1. Publish the Economic and Community Benefits Report.
Please provide the report, methodology, principal data sources, assumptions and supporting calculation tables. Identify the development capacity, construction programme, phasing and occupancy assumptions used. If it is not yet available, give its expected publication date and identify the evidence currently supporting the consultation’s economic claims.

2. Identify responsibility for the assessment.
Please confirm who commissioned and prepared the economic assessment, Pegasus’s role, and whether it will receive independent review. Explain whether its forecasts reflect an identified operator’s requirements or assumptions about a future operator.

3. Establish the existing employment baseline.
Please provide aggregate figures for the businesses, employment and economic activity currently supported by the land required for the development. Explain which activities would cease or relocate, the relocation assumptions made, and how the consequences for businesses, employees and supply chains have been assessed.

4. Show the net additional employment benefit.
Please distinguish gross employment from the net change after accounting for existing activity, displacement and employment that would otherwise arise. Show the results for clearly defined geographic areas, including Cookham and RBWM, and explain the comparison used for what would happen without the development.

5. Explain the approximately 75 permanent jobs.
Please state whether this means headcount or full-time equivalents; whether it includes contractors and support services; and whether it represents opening, a particular phase or full occupation. Provide the expected occupational mix, indicative pay ranges and qualifications, and evidence supporting the anticipated proportion filled by local residents.

6. Separate construction employment from permanent employment.
Please provide the expected construction duration, average and peak workforce, and total job-years. Distinguish on-site jobs from off-site supply-chain employment and explain the expected local share. Identify any assessment of competing demand for workers and contractors from other major developments in the area.

INVESTMENT, WIDER BENEFITS AND LOCATION

7. Break down the £750 million investment figure.
Please identify the period covered and main components, including land, construction, grid and other infrastructure, IT equipment and any future replacement expenditure. Estimate how much would be spent within RBWM, elsewhere in the UK and overseas, explaining the basis and uncertainty of those estimates.

8. Explain employment multipliers and wider economic effects.
Please distinguish direct, indirect and induced employment and define “local” wherever used. Identify the multiplier sources and their suitability for this development and area, including adjustments for spending outside the area and displacement. Show how the results change under reasonable alternative assumptions.

9. Separate investment, GVA and public revenues.
If GVA, business rates or other tax revenues are relied upon as benefits, please provide their calculation, geographic scope and time period. Identify any estimated additional revenue retained by RBWM. Explain how the different measures relate and how overlapping benefits have been avoided.

10. Substantiate the reasons for choosing Long Lane.
Please explain what the Slough Availability Zone means in this proposal and provide evidence supporting the project’s connectivity, latency, resilience and grid requirements. Identify reasonable alternative sites or layouts assessed within the justified search area, the criteria used, and why Long Lane is preferred, including consideration of homes and environmental effects.

11. Distinguish forecasts from deliverable commitments.
Please identify which employment, apprenticeship, training, local procurement, park and other community benefits are forecasts, aspirations or firm commitments. For each proposed commitment, give its scale or budget, delivery date, responsible organisation, proposed mechanism for securing it, and monitoring arrangements. Explain how commitments would be maintained through changes of ownership or operator.

12. Identify infrastructure and public-space benefits.
Where infrastructure upgrades are presented as community benefits, please explain what additional service or capacity would be available to residents or other businesses. For the proposed park, provide the intended delivery timetable, public-access arrangements and long-term management and funding proposals.

ASTORIA PARK AND THE CONSULTATION PROCESS

13. Provide a complete plan showing the relationship with Astoria Park.
Please publish an accurate, scaled plan showing the proposal alongside all existing and approved phases of Astoria Park. Identify relevant homes, gardens and public spaces; distances to proposed buildings and external plant; building and rooftop-equipment heights; and relevant ground levels and screening.

14. Explain how neighbouring homes are being assessed.
Please confirm that existing and approved Astoria Park homes are included in visual, noise, lighting and construction assessments. Identify the viewpoints, residential assessment locations and assumptions used. Provide representative visualisations and explain how assessments address overnight operation, cooling equipment, generator testing and emergency operation, including screening at opening and after planting matures.

15. Provide a publication and response timetable.
Please explain when supporting reports will be available and how residents will have a reasonable opportunity to comment. If important evidence will appear after this consultation, explain how further comments will be considered. Confirm that the consultation report will identify substantive issues raised, the team’s responses, and resulting changes or reasons for retaining the proposals.

Please respond against each numbered request, with document titles, page references and links where answers already exist. Where information is unavailable, please identify the outstanding work and provide a publication timetable.

If material cannot be disclosed, please explain why and provide a suitably redacted version or sufficient supporting information to assess the relevant claim.

Please acknowledge receipt and confirm when I can expect substantive answers or a publication timetable.

Kind regards,

[Your name]