Hubbry Logo
London ResortLondon ResortMain
Open search
London Resort
Community hub
London Resort
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
London Resort
London Resort
London Resort
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

The London Resort, originally known as the London Paramount Entertainment Resort, was a proposed theme park and resort in Swanscombe, Kent, first announced on 8 October 2012. The complex was renamed to London Resort in 2017, after Paramount Studios withdrew it's support for the project.[3][4][5]

Key Information

In March 2022, the application for the resort was officially withdrawn following concerns raised by Natural England, and issues with the free port status of Tilbury. The company announced its intention to scale back plans and to resubmit an application the following year.[6][7] London Resort Company Holdings went into administration in March 2023.[8] The project was largely backed by Abdulla Al-Humaidi, who also served as director until his own bankruptcy in 2023.[9] Some doubted that the resort would ever be built.[10][11][12]

In 2023, Paramount sued London Resort Company Holdings, alleging that the restructuring implemented earlier that year was unfair and featured irregularities.[13]

Plan

[edit]

At the 2012 launch of the project it was announced that the complex would feature Europe's largest indoor water park, theatres, live music venues, attractions, cinemas, restaurants, event space and hotels.[14] Allied to the project would be a training academy for the entertainment and hospitality sectors, a new country park, a large science and education visitor complex and "the biggest performing arts centre in Europe".[15] With an initial completion date announced for 2019, the park and related enterprises were expected to employ 27,000 people.[16] Plans were since reviewed and revised, with the London Resort announcing its intention to open in 2024.[5] Considerable uncertainty as to when the planning application would be made lingered, and the appointed Examining Authority was increasingly critical of the lack of progress made by the LRCH in updating documents ahead of the examination.[17]

The park was initially planned in partnership with Paramount Pictures, and would have been known as the London Paramount Entertainment Resort,[18] with the park's theme having an emphasis on Britain and Kent, as well as Paramount films and entertainment properties. The team at the Resort subsequently agreed with Paramount to separate in 2017, and the project became known as the London Resort.

In 2019, a licensing agreement was reached with Paramount Studios which would allow London Resort to use their Intellectual Property in rides.[19]

Following meetings between representatives of the project and government ministers (George Osborne, Bob Neill, Brandon Lewis and Kris Hopkins), it became the first commercial venture to be awarded nationally significant infrastructure project status, allowing the developers to bypass local planning requirements. [2][20][21][22][23][24]

In 2014, it was hoped that the park would spur the development of a new Garden City development at nearby Ebbsfleet.[25][26]

A ferry terminal was proposed on Swanscombe Peninsula to bring visitors from another new terminal in Tilbury, Essex.[2]

The cost of the development was estimated at £3.5 billion in 2017,[27] although it was not clear how – and from whom – this funding would be provided. The Funding Statement submitted with the planning application says that “investors to fund the equity and debt financing have been identified but have chosen to remain confidential at present”.[28]

Process

[edit]

A Development Consent Order (DCO) application was submitted on 31 December 2020.[29] It was originally envisaged that the Examination of the application would get underway in April 2021, but the applicant (LRCH) then asked for an additional four months to submit updates, following a decision by Natural England to designate much of the development area as a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI).[30][31]

There were further delays and extensions, and in December 2021 the Examining Authority (at the Planning Inspectorate) launched a consultation (until 24 January 2022) with the applicant and interested parties (which includes objectors), asking whether an ongoing delay to the commencement of this Examination as requested by the applicant (LRCH) remains justified, appropriate and in the public interest.[32] The Examining Authority signalled that if the delay was curtailed, it could proceed directly to examine the application as currently before it, commencing in March 2022. LRCH's option on the majority of the land needed for the development expired in December 2022, according to the accounts of owners Swanscombe Development LLP.[33]

On 29 March 2022, plans were officially withdrawn, citing Natural England's concerns and issues with the classification of Tilbury as a free port. Chief executive PY Gerbeau announced the company's intention to submit fresh plans before the end of the year.[6]

In December 2022 it was announced that the plans for the park had been scaled back and that PY Gerbeau would step down as CEO and that the plans for the resort would be resubmitted in 2023.[34][7] In March 2023, LRCH went into administration, and said they were going to resubmit plans, although this has yet to happen. In November, Paramount sued LRCH,[35] and nothing else about the project has come since. On 27 June 2024, Swanscombe Development LLP was listed for sale and thus the land for The London Resort itself along with it.[36] In December 2024, the High Court confirmed that the company behind the resort had ceased to trade and ordered that a petition be presented for its winding-up.[37][38] In January 2025, a High Court judge ordered the company be wound up.[39]

Attractions

[edit]

The themed lands planned for the park included:[40]

  • Starport
  • The Jungle
  • The Isles
  • The Kingdom
  • The Woods
  • The Studio
  • High Street

In April 2021, a dinosaur-themed "Base Camp" land was announced featuring:[41]

  • A triple launched roller coaster exceeding 70 mph and 1 km of track based on the Quetzalcoatlus
  • A family orientated roller coaster
  • An indoor 1500 seat show arena
  • A motion-based 4D dark ride themed to water-based dinosaurs
  • An interactive dark ride where guests track and tag dinosaurs using "sophisticated gaming technology"
  • Play areas, excavation sites and ziplines
  • Two food and beverage locations, one celebrating the life and legacy of Mary Anning and the other an underwater restaurant

Paramount Pictures[42] was attached to the proposal, with the intention of showcasing Hollywood and British culture. Several companies that planned to support the project but later backed out include Aardman Animations, the British Film Institute,[5][43] the BBC, and ITV.[44] The latter two backed out of the project in February 2022, after reports that the endangered Attulus distinguendus species of spider, better known as the distinguished jumping spider, was discovered to be living on the site.[45]

Other rides and attractions that were expected to be based on Paramount blockbusters were Mission: Impossible, The Italian Job and A Quiet Place.[citation needed][46] It was confirmed that 70% of the parks attractions would be indoors due to England's weather conditions, allowing year-round operation.[47]

BBC Worldwide productions expected to feature in the theme park were Doctor Who, Sherlock and Top Gear[48] Rides and attractions that would have also been featured included the ITV children's programmes Thunderbirds Are Go and Robozuna.[49]

Development

[edit]

The site, which is not in London, straddled the border of the Dartford and Gravesham boroughs and both authorities had previously pledged their support.[50] Dartford Borough Council has since published its preference for an alternative proposal for the site, with a scheme incorporating “lower density, mixed uses and ecological improvements”, instead of London Resort.[51]

In April 2013 newspaper reports[52] claimed development may be delayed by the discovery of a rare species of spider. Sefton pledged to remove the colony of distinguished jumping spiders (Attulus distinguendus) to another suitable site.

The following month, the Kent Messenger reported[53] that plans for the theme park could be endangered if a new Lower Thames Crossing was sited over the Swanscombe Peninsula and quoted Sefton: "It could really scupper plans. We are in the final throes of negotiating a very large investment and this makes it very difficult." The proposal was rejected that December.[54]

In June 2020, further details were released outlining the steps being taken in preparation for submitting planning permission in late 2020, with public consultations scheduled for Q3 2020.[55][56] An environmental report was also submitted in June 2020.[57]

On 31 December 2020, LRCH submitted its Development Consent Order (DCO) planning application to the Government, via the Planning Inspectorate.[58] On 28 January 2021, LRCH were advised that the application had been accepted for examination.[59] This was followed on 19 February by an invitation for interested parties to register their interest in the application, up until 31 March.[60] A public inquiry was expected to take up to a year and a half.[61] In the absence of any further delays, Sky News reported it would lead to the first gate opening in 2024.[62] In March that year, Natural England listed much of the proposed site as a Site of Special Scientific Interest in view of its diverse insect life. This led to a significant delay to the progress of the application.[63]

On 29 March 2022, the plans were officially withdrawn, with the intention of resubmitting them in 2023.[64][7] In March 2023, London Resort Company Holdings went into administration.[65][66]

On 17 January 2025, LRCH was issued a winding up order by the High Court, a month after a judge deemed it had breached a payment agreement with its creditors. A spokesman for LRCH said: "The dream of the London Resort has been ended by the courts."[67] On 13 March 2025, LRCH entered liquidation.[68]

Resorts

[edit]

In August 2019, LRCH announced a partnership with Radisson Hotels to build a 430-room hotel within the resort.[69] In the environmental scoping report published in June 2020, it was detailed that the park intends to build 4 hotels in addition to the theme parks totalling approximately 3550 rooms with 2500 rooms to be available for the first park. The plan also revealed a proposed 3000 seat convention/conference centre, an eSports arena and a number of indoor and outdoor theatres.[70]

Reactions

[edit]

The project received mixed responses within Kent.[71] A commentary in the London Evening Standard in October 2012 called into question the commitment of some of the development partners, namely landowner Lafarge Tarmac, builder Brookfield Construction and property company Development Securities.[72] In December 2012 the project secured the services of Chris Townsend as its commercial director.[73] Townsend performed the same role for the London Organising Committee of the Olympic and Paralympic Games on behalf of the London 2012 Summer Olympics and was charged with attracting investors for debt and equity funding.

In September 2020, the conservation charity Buglife began a campaign to save the Swanscombe Peninsula from development and to have the site designated as a Site of Special Scientific Interest.[74] Buglife described the peninsula as “a brownfield of the highest quality for wildlife, as well as a valued community space for walking, bird watching, angling and escaping the hustle and bustle of North Kent”. In March 2021, Natural England designated the Swanscombe Peninsula as a SSSI for nationally important invertebrates, breeding birds, plants and geology.[75] This designation was subject to a four-month period (until 12 July 2021) in which anyone could make representations or object to the notification.[76] Following the ending of the representation period, London Resort Company Holdings announced that they had objected to the designation, and accused Natural England of seeking to frustrate their planning application.[77] In response, Buglife described the objection as a "transparent PR effort that misrepresents the data of London Resort's own wildlife surveys". Natural England subsequently told the BBC that said it would try to address the concerns raised in a "small number of objections". On 10 November 2021, Natural England's Board met, and decided to confirm the SSSI designation.[78] In doing so, it disregarded LRCH's objections to the SSSI, with the board papers making clear that only very minor adjustments would be made to the boundary.[79]

On 24 November, LRCH's Chief Executive wrote to the Planning Inspectorate, describing Natural England's decision as erroneous, before announcing “subtle changes” to the design of the project in response to the SSSI designation. The Chief Executive also set out their “off-site ecological compensation strategy is being reframed to directly account for SSSI impacts”.[80] Natural England responded that “[off-site] compensation cannot adequately address the harm that would result to the SSSI from the development proposal, as the feasibility of doing this is considered low and very unlikely to offer an equivalent assemblage and richness of species”.[81]

The Thames Crossing Action Group, who represent those opposed to the proposed Lower Thames Crossing, have voiced concerns over traffic issues that would be generated by the London Resort.[82] Similar concerns have also been voiced about traffic and transport by Transport for London, Network Rail, and local Government leaders.[83]

Writing in 2021, local newspapers News Shopper and Kent Live both queried whether the resort would ever open, given the extensive delays and lack of progress.[11][84]

On 23 November 2021, a number of existing local businesses wrote – along with the Save Swanscombe Peninsula campaign – to the Planning Inspectorate, challenging the approach which has been taken in granting the applicant (LRCH) a series of extensions, contrary to Government Guidance.[85][86] The letter set out a series of concerns, including how the uncertainty was blighting the 100+ businesses operating in the shadow of compulsory acquisition, before going on to ask the Examining Authority to take urgent action to prevent delay of the examination beyond April 2022. It was following receipt of this letter which the Examining Authority decided to launch a consultation with the applicant and interested parties on about whether the examination of the application should continue to be delayed. The Examining Authority was critical of LRCH's approach to providing information and said that the applicant's conduct was a relevant consideration for what happens next.

In March 2022, Dartford MP Gareth Johnson withdrew his support for the London Resort, citing LRCH's failure to engage with local residents and the impact the resort would have on traffic and wildlife.[87] Interviewed in April 2023, he said he considered the project to be "dead in the water".[12]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

London Resort

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
The London Resort was a proposed entertainment complex and theme park planned for the Swanscombe Peninsula in , , first publicly announced on 8 October 2012 by London Resort Company Holdings. Intended as the United Kingdom's first major purpose-built theme park destination, the project envisioned a £3.5 billion development featuring a theme park with rides themed around film and media properties including potential Paramount collaborations, an , hotels, an entertainment district, and supporting infrastructure to attract over 6 million visitors annually. The development faced protracted delays due to challenges in securing funding, obtaining Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project (NSIP) consent from the Planning Inspectorate, and overcoming environmental opposition, particularly from conservation groups highlighting the site's designation as a potential for its rare grasslands and habitats. Despite promises of substantial economic benefits including thousands of jobs and regional regeneration, the project encountered skepticism over its financial viability, with limited land acquisition and repeated postponements of development applications. In January 2025, a judge issued a winding-up order against London Resort Company Holdings, effectively terminating the project amid unpaid debts and creditor petitions, marking the end of over a decade of planning without any construction commencing. Conservation organizations welcomed the decision as a preservation victory for the ecologically sensitive site, while the failure underscored broader difficulties in delivering large-scale leisure developments in environmentally constrained locations. The site's land was subsequently marketed for alternative uses, including potential housing and smaller-scale projects, reflecting a shift away from the ambitious theme park vision.

Background and Initial Proposal

Conception and Early Planning (2012–2014)

The London Resort project emerged from initiatives by London Resort Company Holdings Limited, which had been incorporated on 6 May 2011 to pursue large-scale entertainment developments. On 8 October 2012, the company publicly announced plans for a £2 billion theme park and resort on the 350-hectare Swanscombe Peninsula in Kent, initially branded as the London Paramount Entertainment Resort under a licensing agreement with Paramount Pictures. The proposal positioned the site—twice the size of London's Olympic Park—as Europe's premier entertainment destination, featuring rides and attractions themed around Paramount film franchises such as Star Trek, The Godfather, and Transformers, with an anticipated opening in 2019. Early planning in 2012–2013 emphasized feasibility studies, conceptual designs, and partnership negotiations, including the Paramount deal to leverage Hollywood for broad appeal. The consortium behind London Resort Company Holdings, comprising British developers, highlighted the site's proximity to —reachable within 20 minutes by —as a key advantage for attracting 15 million annual visitors and generating economic benefits estimated at £2.4 billion in . Initial concepts included a mix of thrill rides, water parks, and hotels, drawing comparisons to while promising year-round operation with indoor facilities to mitigate weather challenges. By early 2014, efforts advanced toward regulatory hurdles, culminating in the project's classification as a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project (NSIP). On 9 May 2014, the Secretary of State for Communities and issued a Section 35 Direction under the Planning Act 2008, granting NSIP status and enabling centralized decision-making by the Planning Inspectorate rather than local authorities. This designation, sought to expedite approvals for projects of national importance exceeding £50 million, marked a pivotal step in legitimizing the scale of the proposed infrastructure, including transport links and environmental mitigations.

Site Selection and Acquisition

The site selection process for the London Resort began following the project's initial announcement on October 8, 2012, with London Resort Company Holdings (LRCH) defining an area of search within approximately 100 kilometers of , primarily along a corridor from to while excluding land and areas of outstanding natural beauty. LRCH established specific criteria to evaluate potential sites, including land availability (requiring at least 80 hectares of relatively level terrain suitable for commercial development), preference for brownfield sites to minimize residential displacement and enable regeneration, proximity to London population centers, multi-modal transport accessibility (such as rail, road, and river links), and limited environmental or planning constraints. Eleven alternative sites were assessed against these criteria, with options including locations in and other parts of ; Peninsula emerged as the preferred location due to its large-scale brownfield characteristics, position just 1 kilometer from Ebbsfleet International station (offering a 17-minute connection to St. Pancras), location outside the , and potential for economic regeneration of a former industrial area. The preferred site was publicly announced in , with further review of the long list conducted in 2017 as part of ongoing planning assessments. Regarding land acquisition, LRCH secured a binding option agreement in early 2015 with landowner Lafarge Tarmac (now part of ) to purchase approximately 388 acres (157 hectares) on Peninsula, providing the core land necessary for the development while allowing time for planning approvals. This agreement covered much of the peninsula's brownfield expanse, previously used for production and aggregates extraction, but did not constitute outright ownership at the time. Development LLP, a between UK Ltd and Anglo American International Holdings, held ownership of around 372 acres of the peninsula plus adjacent parcels and had granted related development options to LRCH; however, these options lapsed without renewal in December 2022 amid project delays. No full compulsory acquisition powers were exercised, as the Development Consent Order application—submitted in 2020 and later withdrawn in March 2022 following the site's designation as a —would have enabled such measures if approved, but the process stalled due to environmental and financial hurdles.

Planned Features and Attractions

Core Theme Park Elements

The core theme park elements of the London Resort were planned to revolve around two primary theme parks, with the first featuring over 50 rides and attractions across six immersive themed lands, approximately 70% of which were to be undercover to accommodate the UK's variable weather. The development aimed to integrate original concepts alongside licensed intellectual properties from partners including , , and , such as potential rides inspired by , Sherlock, and blockbuster films like . At least 12 major rides were envisioned, emphasizing next-generation technology in thrill experiences, multimedia shows, and interactive elements. The themed lands were designed to transport visitors through diverse narrative worlds, blending British heritage, global mythology, and futuristic visions:
  • The Studios: A gritty, warehouse-style district focused on action and , featuring high-thrill rides simulating movie set chases and stunts.
  • The Woods: An enchanted storybook realm drawing from fairy tales and fables, with family-friendly attractions including dark rides and gentle amid lush, immersive foliage.
  • The Kingdom: A medieval Arthurian-inspired land of swords, sorcery, dragons, and legends, incorporating facades and knightly quests in its and experiences.
  • The Isles: Home to mythical beasts and giant creatures, this area was to showcase innovative ride systems, such as advanced and launch evoking prehistoric or legendary monsters.
  • The Jungle: Overgrown ancient ruins merging historical exploration with speculative future elements, planned for adventure rides like river rapids and suspended through simulated wild terrains.
  • The Starport: A sci-fi hub with big-thrill rides, including simulators and hyperspace-themed launches, emphasizing cutting-edge audiovisual effects.
Standout attractions included a multi-launch in the Base Camp prehistoric zone—potentially aligned with The Isles—exceeding 70 mph over 1 km of track, themed around the , alongside a family-oriented coaster, a large stage show, and an advanced simulator ride. These elements were intended to position the resort as Europe's most ambitious theme park project, prioritizing technological innovation and narrative depth over mere replication of existing models.

Supporting Infrastructure and Resorts

The proposed London Resort development included provisions for multiple on-site to accommodate visitors, with plans for four principal hotels totaling approximately 3,550 rooms or keys. These comprised Hotel H1 with 800 keys, H2 with 1,500 keys, H3 with 850 keys, and H4 with 400 keys, one of which was designated to incorporate an integrated facility. At least 10% of hotel rooms were required to be wheelchair-accessible, with step-free access to entrances and accommodations. Supporting transportation infrastructure emphasized multimodal access to reduce reliance on private vehicles, including a new dedicated 4-lane access road extending from the A2 highway to the Peninsula site. Plans incorporated 10,000 visitor parking spaces (7,500 on the side and 2,500 at in ), 500 staff parking spaces, and 200 coach bays, alongside integration with existing Fastrack bus services. An electric system was proposed to connect the site to , while two new ferry terminals—one at and another at —would facilitate Thames River crossings from and . Segregated service roads were designated for deliveries and back-of-house operations to minimize disruption to guest areas. Utility and environmental infrastructure plans addressed flood risk, water management, and waste handling. Flood defenses on the Kent site were to be elevated to a 7-meter crest level, with realignments at the Essex site. Peak daily water demand was estimated at 13.3 million liters, with measures for a 25% reduction in potable use via sustainable drainage systems (SuDS) and an on-site wastewater treatment plant. Waste management included a central transfer station handling 22,500 tonnes annually, prioritizing for removal to lessen road impacts. Ancillary facilities encompassed a , staff accommodations for up to 500 personnel, and new wetlands for drainage. The overall strategy aimed to maximize use of , rail, and public options while promoting and cycling access within the site.

Environmental and Sustainability Claims

The London Resort project promoters, London Resort Company Holdings (LRCH), asserted that the development would prioritize sustainability by redeveloping , including areas with historical from prior industrial uses on the Peninsula site. This approach was presented as an environmental positive, transforming underutilized and polluted terrain into a mixed-use while mitigating legacy through remediation efforts outlined in the project's planning statements. LRCH claimed the resort would integrate existing natural features into its design, retaining a substantial portion of the site as green space to preserve and enhance ecological connectivity. Developers emphasized seamless incorporation of the peninsula's grasslands, wetlands, and tree cover into landscaped areas, positioning the project as a model for balancing urban development with rather than wholesale . Operational sustainability goals included ambitions to achieve carbon neutrality, with commitments to sources, a network of green amenity spaces, and infrastructure such as enhanced public transit links to reduce reliance on private vehicles. LRCH described these elements as positioning the London Resort as one of the world's most sustainable theme parks, incorporating energy-efficient designs and waste minimization strategies from the outset. The project's scoping report further supported these claims by outlining assessments for air quality, , and water management to ensure minimal long-term ecological disruption.

Development Timeline and Process

Key Milestones and Applications (2015–2020)

In 2015, the London Resort Company Holdings (LRCH) conducted a statutory on the project, though the anticipated planning application submission in autumn of that year did not materialize, marking an early delay in the development process. The project, previously associated with Paramount branding, faced scrutiny over its timeline, with expectations for construction to begin post-approval leading to an initial opening target of Easter 2020 that proved overly optimistic. By June 2016, LRCH publicly acknowledged further delays in submitting the planning application to local authorities, originally slated for 2015, citing the need for additional preparation amid the project's designation as a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project (NSIP) under the Planning Act 2008. This NSIP status, secured in 2014 as the first for a commercial leisure development, shifted oversight to the Planning Inspectorate, requiring a Development Consent Order (DCO) rather than standard local planning approval. In June 2017, Paramount Pictures withdrew its involvement, ending the association with the studio's intellectual properties and prompting a strategic pivot away from branded content reliance. By October 12, 2017, the project was rebranded as "The London Resort," emphasizing a broader focus with new backers anticipated to be announced, while maintaining ambitions for a £3.2 billion investment across 670 acres on the Swanscombe Peninsula. Progress resumed in 2019 with an August partnership announcement with for on-site accommodations, including a planned 430-room as part of four projected properties totaling around 3,550 rooms. In December 2019, LRCH released updated detailing six themed lands, signaling refined masterplanning ahead of formal submissions. Early 2020 brought renewed delays, with the DCO application postponed from spring to at least amid ongoing refinements. In April, LRCH leadership, including CEO PY Gerbeau, reaffirmed commitment to the £5 billion scheme despite global disruptions from the . June saw the publication of an (EIA) Scoping Report, outlining potential ecological and transport impacts for regulatory review. A virtual public consultation launched on July 27, 2020, running through September 21, to gather feedback on updated proposals, adapting to restrictions while addressing prior concerns from 2015 consultations. In , LRCH unveiled revisions informed by survey responses, including enhanced measures and mitigations. The period culminated on December 31, 2020, with submission of the full DCO application to the Planning Inspectorate, encompassing detailed plans for phased openings starting in 2024.

Partnerships, Funding, and Revisions (2021–2023)

In June 2021, urged the Planning Inspectorate to require London Resort Company Holdings (LRCH) to withdraw and resubmit its Development Consent Order (DCO) application, citing deficiencies in the and traffic modeling. This followed ongoing scrutiny amid the project's Nationally Significant Project status. In November 2021, designated the Peninsula as a (SSSI), intensifying environmental challenges and prompting LRCH to reassess its scope. By March 2022, LRCH withdrew its DCO application, attributing the decision to the SSSI designation, alterations in nearby port operations at and Grays, and the need for plan revisions to address feasibility concerns. The withdrawal marked a significant delay, with no underway despite over £100 million expended since . In 2022, LRCH announced a reduced application for submission in 2023, scaling back the project footprint to portions of the peninsula while avoiding SSSI areas, alongside management transitions: CEO Pierre-Yves Gerbeau stepped down from full-time duties but remained an advisor, board members Alan Crane and Ahmed Al Aiban departed, and Chairman Steve Norris continued in his role, emphasizing commitment to revised plans. Funding relied heavily on Kuwaiti European Holdings (KEH), controlled by the Al Humaidi family, but faced setbacks as Middle Eastern investment waned following oil price fluctuations. An option to purchase land from Developments expired in December 2022, incurring a £3.3 million loss. Partnerships with content providers like and , established around 2019 for intellectual property integration, persisted but did not resolve capital shortfalls. Relations with strained, as the studio—holding a 2019 IP agreement after relinquishing in 2017—opposed subsequent financial maneuvers. In March 2023, LRCH entered administration amid mounting debts, with KEH founder Dr. Abdulla Al-Humaidi resigning from the board earlier that month. A Company Voluntary Arrangement (CVA) was approved in April 2023, converting creditor debts to equity stakes to avert , though Paramount contested the restructuring as prejudicial. This measure aimed to secure new funding for resubmission, but legal disputes and expired agreements, including a canceled access deal with Port and a stalled Radisson hotel partnership, underscored persistent viability issues. Norris maintained the project would proceed, projecting 20,000 jobs, yet no revised DCO materialized by year's end.

Controversies and Challenges

Environmental Disputes and Ecological Assessments

The Swanscombe Peninsula site, proposed for the London Resort, comprises brownfield land with significant ecological value, including habitats supporting rare invertebrates such as the shrill carder bee (Bombus sylvarum), mining bees, ground beetles, and shieldbugs, as well as reptiles like common lizards (Zootoca vivipara) and slow-worms (Anguis fragilis). Natural England notified the area as a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) on 11 February 2021, citing its national importance for invertebrate assemblages and brownfield biodiversity in a region otherwise dominated by urban development. The designation highlighted the site's role in conserving threatened species amid habitat fragmentation, with surveys documenting over 1,000 invertebrate species, including 28 nationally rare or scarce ones. London Resort Company Holdings (LRCH) submitted an (EIA) scoping report in July 2020 to outline potential effects on terrestrial, marine, and geoenvironmental features, including assessments of air quality, noise, water resources, and . Marine ecology surveys conducted by APEM in 2022 evaluated impacts on the adjacent Estuary Marine Conservation Zone (MCZ), focusing on protected features like the tentacled lagoon worm (Alkmaria romijni) and subtidal mud habitats, alongside (WFD) compliance for river ecology. A geoenvironmental study updated in 2020 identified risks from historical industrial contamination, recommending remediation measures to mitigate soil and during . LRCH claimed the project would incorporate features, such as carbon-neutral operations and habitat enhancements, arguing that unmanaged dereliction would degrade over time. Environmental disputes intensified following the SSSI notification, with LRCH formally objecting on 14 2021, contending that Natural England's assessment overlooked ecological decline data from baseline surveys showing vegetation overgrowth suppressing invertebrate populations and that development could enable management superior to the status quo. Conservation organizations, including Kent Wildlife Trust and Buglife, countered that the project posed irreversible risks to protected species and habitats, urging detailed lighting, noise, and hydrological impact assessments under the Habitats Regulations 2017 to evaluate in-combination effects with nearby developments. In 2023, a coalition of nature groups petitioned the Secretary of State for Levelling Up to revoke the site's Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project (NSIP) status, arguing it impeded SSSI management and local wildlife protections despite unproven environmental mitigations. These conflicts, compounded by mandatory SSSI impact consultations, contributed to prolonged permitting delays and heightened scrutiny over the project's ecological feasibility.

Financial Mismanagement and Creditor Conflicts

The London Resort Company Holdings Limited (LRCH) accumulated debts exceeding £100 million amid stalled development progress, prompting administration proceedings in March 2023. To avert liquidation, LRCH proposed a Company Voluntary Arrangement (CVA) in early 2023, offering creditors shares in the company in compromise of unsecured debts; the CVA was approved following a creditors' meeting on April 4, 2023. However, the arrangement quickly faltered due to non-compliance with its terms, including failures to make required distributions or fulfill restructuring obligations, which courts later deemed irremediable breaches. Creditor conflicts intensified with Paramount Licensing Inc., to whom LRCH owed £13.5 million in unpaid licensing fees related to theme park branding rights. Paramount challenged the CVA's validity, alleging it masked a prejudicial that transferred control to majority shareholder Dr. Abdulla Al-Humaidi while diluting other creditors' interests; the company pursued legal action in November 2023, citing procedural irregularities in the April 2023 . Despite opposition, the CVA supervisor declined to terminate the arrangement despite evident breaches, prompting Paramount to petition the on October 11, 2024, for LRCH's winding-up. In December 2024, the ruled that LRCH had committed multiple irremediable breaches of the CVA, including supervisory oversights, and ordered its termination under section 7(3) of the Insolvency Act 1986. This decision dismissed LRCH's defenses and exposed systemic failures in debt management and creditor negotiations, with the court criticizing the company's actions as unreasonable and ordering it to cover opponents' costs. The winding-up order was finalized on January 17, 2025, effectively dissolving the entity and prioritizing claims in liquidation proceedings. These events underscored mismanagement through over-reliance on unfulfilled restructuring promises and inadequate oversight, eroding confidence and halting any viable path to revival.

Local and Regulatory Opposition

Local residents and conservation organizations in expressed strong opposition to the London Resort project, primarily citing the irreversible loss of ecologically valuable habitat on the Swanscombe Peninsula, a former industrial site that had naturally regenerated into a supporting protected such as water voles and rare beetles. Groups including Buglife, the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB), Kent Wildlife Trust, Campaign to Protect Rural England () Kent, and Save Swanscombe Peninsula mobilized against the development, arguing it would concrete over more than 100 hectares of land and undermine local wildlife recovery efforts. These organizations, along with broader environmental campaigners, highlighted the site's transformation from contaminated brownfield to a haven for and birds, contending that the theme park's scale—equivalent to 136 Stadiums—posed unacceptable risks to regional despite mitigation promises. Additional local concerns focused on infrastructure strain, particularly exacerbated by the proposed road project. The Thames Crossing Action Group, representing residents opposed to the crossing, warned that the resort would generate excessive vehicle volumes on already burdened roads, worsening delays and without adequate transport upgrades. MP withdrew his support for the project on March 16, 2022, citing repeated delays and unfulfilled commitments as reasons for doubting its deliverability. Regulatory hurdles intensified opposition through the UK's planning framework. In February 2022, the Planning Inspectorate (PINS) rejected the London Resort Company Holdings' (LRCH) request to extend its Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project (NSIP) application deadline from March to July, expressing "considerable doubt" that revised plans would be ready and compliant with environmental standards. This led LRCH to withdraw its full planning application on March 30, 2022, amid ongoing scrutiny of ecological impacts and failure to address prior objections. Conservation groups subsequently campaigned in July 2023 to revoke the site's NSIP designation, arguing it inappropriately fast-tracked development on a location better suited for restoration than commercial entertainment. These regulatory setbacks, rooted in mandatory environmental assessments and public consultations, contributed to prolonged uncertainty and the project's eventual financial collapse, with opponents viewing the NSIP status as an overreach that bypassed rigorous local planning safeguards.

Projected Impacts and Debates

Economic Promises and Job Creation Arguments

Proponents of the London Resort project argued that it would deliver substantial economic benefits to the , particularly in the southeast region, by regenerating a largely brownfield site on the Peninsula and stimulating and related sectors. The development was projected to generate £50 billion in (GVA) to the economy over an initial 25-year period following opening, driven by visitor expenditures, activities, and induced spending. This included annual revenues estimated at £150–200 million by project maturity in 2038, alongside local business spending of £85 million per year outside the resort itself. Central to these arguments was job creation, with the construction phase alone expected to support over 6,000 jobs, contributing approximately 23,000 gross job years across the site's phased development from 2022 to 2029. Upon operational maturity, direct employment at the resort was forecasted at 17,310 positions by 2038, encompassing roles in theme park operations, , retail, and maintenance. Including indirect jobs in supply chains and induced from visitor spending, total job impacts were promoted as reaching up to 48,000, though some project communications cited a figure of around 30,000 jobs overall. These opportunities were emphasized as providing skilled and semi-skilled positions, estimated at 8,700 collectively, with commitments to local , apprenticeships, and skills to address regional and support workforce development. The economic case further highlighted the resort's potential to attract 12.5 million annual visitors by 2038—up from 6.5 million in early operations—fostering a multiplier effect on nearby economies through increased demand for transport, accommodation, and services. Developers contended that these inflows would yield £520 million in additional annual GVA by maturity, positioning the project as a catalyst for inward investment and long-term regional competitiveness, comparable to established European theme parks like Disneyland Paris. Local authorities and project backers argued that such regeneration would transform an underutilized industrial area into a high-value leisure hub, enhancing property values, business rates, and overall fiscal contributions without relying on public subsidies beyond initial infrastructure support.

Critiques of Feasibility and Overoptimism

Critics of the London Resort project highlighted fundamental flaws in its economic modeling and planning assumptions, arguing that the absence of a rigorous, independent undermined claims of viability from the project's in 2012. Industry commentators, including those tracking major attractions, pointed out that London Resort Company Holdings (LRCH) proceeded without validating key benchmarks such as construction costs, operational expenses, or market demand through comprehensive analysis, leading to persistent funding shortfalls. By 2023, LRCH had accumulated over £100 million in and entered administration, unable to secure the capital required for a £2.5–3.5 billion development, which exposed the overreliance on speculative investor interest rather than grounded financial projections. The Swanscombe Peninsula site drew particular scrutiny for its logistical and infrastructural challenges, which compounded doubts about long-term viability. Located on a former industrial brownfield with contamination remediation needs, the area lacked immediate appeal as a destination, requiring substantial upgrades to links including roads, rail, and potential trams to handle projected crowds. Unresolved deficiencies were cited in reviews as a barrier, with the site's position 30 kilometers east of exacerbating access issues for international visitors compared to more central or rail-connected alternatives. Subsequent decisions by competitors, such as opting for over similar proposals due to "viability concerns and economic reasons," underscored the site's perceived inadequacies in drawing sustained patronage amid regional competition from parks like and global rivals like . Proponents' projections of 17,000–27,000 jobs by 2038 and annual visitor figures exceeding 18 million were dismissed as overly sanguine, ignoring UK-specific factors like inclement weather reducing outdoor attendance and the high of theme park operations. After expending approximately £55 million on by 2020 without , the project's withdrawal of its Development Consent Order application in March 2022—amid funding gaps and partner disputes—illustrated the disconnect between ambitious timelines (initial 2024 opening) and real-world execution risks. The High Court's winding-up order for LRCH in 2025, following breaches of creditor agreements, further validated critiques that the venture's optimism disregarded causal barriers such as investor aversion to unproven sites and protracted regulatory hurdles.

Broader Societal and Infrastructure Concerns

The proposed London Resort, envisioned to attract up to 22,000 visitors daily at peak, was expected to impose severe demands on Kent's transport infrastructure, including the and local roads already strained by commuting and freight. Highways England identified insufficient modeling data for key junctions such as 1a/2 and 30, preventing reliable predictions of congestion severity and mitigation efficacy. The Dartford-Thurrock Crossing, handling over 150,000 vehicles daily and frequently queuing, faced amplified risks of , with projections indicating added delays for cross-Thames travel during operational hours and events. Developer plans included a dedicated interchange with 10,750 spaces across multi-storey facilities and bus/rail enhancements, yet these were deemed inadequate to offset cumulative impacts from traffic—estimated at 500 daily vehicle movements—and long-term visitor flows reliant on private cars. Unresolved deficiencies, alongside environmental factors, prompted the application's withdrawal in March 2022. Beyond roads, the project raised alarms over utility and service strains, including potential overloads on , systems, and power grids in an area lacking commensurate upgrades. The decade of planning limbo eroded local business confidence, with operators citing halted investments and "paralysis" from repeated delays and funding shortfalls. Societally, anticipated tourist surges—drawing 6.5 million annual visitors—threatened to overburden regional health, education, and emergency services, as construction and operations could divert resources from residents without proportional funding commitments. Noise from rides, "scream" effects, and traffic was projected to exceed daytime limits by up to 10 dB in nearby areas, impacting residential amenity and prompting calls for stringent controls that developers struggled to substantiate. The site's Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project status centralized decision-making, sidelining local authorities and fostering community resentment over diminished democratic oversight in land-use changes.

Demise and Legacy

In October 2024, Paramount Licensing Inc., the original licensing partner for the project, petitioned the of to wind up London Resort Company Holdings Limited (LRCH), citing an unpaid debt of £13.5 million arising from licensing agreements. The petition followed LRCH's failure to meet obligations under a Company Voluntary Arrangement (CVA) approved in April 2023, which had aimed to restructure the company's debts after its entry into administration in March 2023. On 10 October 2024, the heard arguments in the case Paramount Licensing Inc v Batty and Another (Re London Resort Company Holdings Ltd), where the court examined breaches of the CVA supervised by William Antony Batty of Antony Batty & Company. The judge determined that LRCH had committed irremediable breaches of the CVA terms, including failures to make required payments and provide adequate information to creditors, rendering the arrangement unsustainable. was handed down on 19 December 2024 in EWHC 3287 (Ch), terminating the CVA effective immediately and dismissing LRCH's cross-application to validate prior actions under it. The termination of the CVA paved the way for compulsory proceedings, with the issuing a winding-up order against LRCH in early 2025. This order effectively ended any remaining viability for the London Resort project, as LRCH ceased trading and entered formal , with assets to be realized for creditors including Paramount. The proceedings highlighted systemic financial distress, with court documents noting the company's inability to secure further or fulfill creditor commitments despite prior revisions to the project plans.

Site Aftermath and Alternative Developments

Following the High Court-ordered winding up of London Resort Company Holdings on January 22, 2025, and subsequent liquidation proceedings, the Swanscombe Peninsula site has seen no advancement toward theme park construction. The 194-hectare brownfield area, designated a (SSSI) since 1994 for its rare coastal grazing marsh habitats supporting species like the pygmy sword-lily (Luzula pygmaea) and distinctive invertebrate communities, faced prolonged development threats that heightened ecological scrutiny. Conservation groups, including Kent Wildlife Trust and the Save Swanscombe Peninsula campaign, celebrated the project's termination as safeguarding the peninsula's biodiversity, arguing that prior development consents overlooked irreplaceable habitat loss despite mitigation promises. Local opposition, rooted in environmental assessments highlighting flood risks and proximity, contributed to the site's pause on intensive redevelopment. As of October 2025, no firm alternative large-scale commercial or entertainment proposals have materialized directly on the , with land ownership fragmented post-liquidation and subject to creditor claims. persists for designating portions as a to restore tidal marshes and promote low-impact public access, aligning with regional policies amid Kent's constrained development landscape. Adjacent brownfield areas, however, have drawn regeneration interest; in May 2025, proposals emerged for an 8,000-seat stadium, hotel complex, and up to 15,000 homes near Ebbsfleet, backed by Borough Council and Ebbsfleet United Football Club to leverage existing infrastructure like the link. These plans emphasize mixed-use over spectacle, contrasting the London Resort's overambitious scope, though critics note potential strain on local without guaranteed economic offsets. The 's interim status underscores unresolved remediation of legacy industrial contamination, delaying any repurposing.

References

  1. https://www.attractionsource.com/history/from-the-archives/london-resort/
  2. https://blooloop.com/theme-park/news/london-resort-plans-paramount-court/
  3. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy7g032m0m0o
  4. https://www.kentwildlifetrust.org.uk/news/swanscombe-saved
  5. https://www.kentonline.co.uk/dartford/news/confirmed-2-5bn-theme-park-dream-is-finally-over-318933/
  6. https://riderater.co.uk/11499/can-universal-succeed-where-the-london-resort-failed/
  7. https://blooloop.com/theme-park/news/london-resort-site-for-sale/
  8. https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/35042251/new-plans-8000-seat-stadium-hotel-uk-disney-land/
  9. https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/07625574
  10. https://deadline.com/2012/10/paramount-theme-park-london-swanscombe-peninsula-349633/
  11. https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/envelope/la-xpm-2012-oct-08-la-et-ct-paramount-theme-park-britain-20121008-story.html
  12. https://metro.co.uk/2012/10/08/paramount-plans-a-2bn-world-class-theme-park-595498/
  13. https://www.bizjournals.com/losangeles/news/2012/10/09/paramount-theme-park-planned-near.html
  14. https://www.kentlive.news/news/kent-news/london-resort-paramount-story-park-2400087
  15. https://nsip-documents.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/published-documents/BC080001-000760-7.1%20Design%20and%20Access%20Statement%20%28Part1%29.pdf
  16. https://nsip-documents.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/published-documents/BC080001-000388-6.1.4%20ES%20Chapter%204%20-%20Project%20development%20and%20alternatives.pdf
  17. https://www.building.co.uk/news/land-deal-for-2bn-kent-theme-park/5073123.article
  18. https://www.cladglobal.com/news.cfm?codeid=313398
  19. https://www.kentinvictachamber.co.uk/news/london-resort-land-earmarked-for-2-5bn-disneyland-style-park-on-swanscombe-peninsula-goes-up-for-sale/
  20. https://cpressex.org.uk/what-future-now-for-london-resort-after-company-is-put-up-for-sale/
  21. https://www.travelandleisure.com/attractions/amusement-parks/the-london-resort-new-uk-theme-park
  22. https://blooloop.com/theme-park/news/london-resort-six-lands-first-look/
  23. https://www.syfy.com/syfy-wire/london-resort-theme-park-preview
  24. https://blooloop.com/theme-park/news/london-resort-planning-application/
  25. https://nsip-documents.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/published-documents/BC080001-000761-7.1%20Design%20and%20Access%20Statement%20%28Part2%29.pdf
  26. https://www.twinfm.com/article/what-is-happening-with-the-london-resort
  27. https://consultationspace.com/LondonResort/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/London-Resort-Banners-Combined.pdf
  28. https://www.cprekent.org.uk/news/swanscombe-peninsula-the-last-resort/
  29. https://inews.co.uk/news/environment/kent-london-resort-theme-park-environmentalists-explained-bugs-charity-734519
  30. https://www.attractionsource.com/2020/06/24/london-resort-submit-scoping-report/
  31. https://www.kentonline.co.uk/dartford/news/the-chequered-history-of-the-uks-disneyland-230409/
  32. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-kent-36442445
  33. https://consultationspace.com/LondonResort/portfolio/the-story-so-far/
  34. https://www.attractionsmanagement.com/attractions-news/Paramount-London-Resort-Company-Holdings-London-Paramount-theme-park-visitor-attractions-Humphrey-Percy-Kuwaiti-European-Holding-Group/332640
  35. https://www.kentonline.co.uk/kent-business/county-news/new-name-the-london-resort-theme-park-kent-swanscombe-peninsula-plus-new-backers-announcement-this-year-former-paramount-pictures-133504/
  36. https://www.kentonline.co.uk/dartford/news/theme-park-boss-recovers-from-coronavirus-226181/
  37. https://blooloop.com/theme-park/news/london-resort-public-consultation/
  38. https://fawkhamparishcouncil.gov.uk/the-london-resort-proposal-at-swanscombe/
  39. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-kent-54522191
  40. https://blooloop.com/theme-park/news/merlin-london-resort-plans-resubmit/
  41. https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/32534696/british-disneyland-furious-row/
  42. https://www.kentonline.co.uk/dartford/news/london-resort-theme-park-will-still-be-built-vows-top-exec-298929/
  43. https://salonmickey.wordpress.com/2022/12/22/london-resort-sees-management-changes-and-reduced-planning-application-for-2023/
  44. https://blooloop.com/theme-park/news/london-resort-signs-deal-itv-studios/
  45. https://screamscape.com/html/the_london_resort.htm
  46. https://cdn.buglife.org.uk/2021/02/Swanscombe-SSSI-rationale-Feb-2021.pdf
  47. https://democracy.gravesham.gov.uk/documents/s59426/200907%2520London%2520Resort%2520Appendix%25202.pdf
  48. https://www.apemltd.com/casestudy/marine-ecology-surveys-and-eia-for-the-london-resort/
  49. https://nsip-documents.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/published-documents/BC080001-000532-6.2.18.6%2520ES%2520Appendix%252018.6%2520Phase%25201%2520Geo-environmental%2520Assessment%2520Update%2520.%2520Kent%2520Project%2520Site%2520%28Swanscombe%2520Peninsula%29.pdf
  50. https://blooloop.com/theme-park/news/london-resort-planning-application-sssi/
  51. https://www.kentonline.co.uk/dartford/news/theme-parks-wildlife-status-unreasonable-and-unjustified-250667/
  52. https://www.kentwildlifetrust.org.uk/sites/default/files/2021-10/London%2520Resort%2520consultation%2520response%2520-%2520KWT.pdf
  53. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/czqynzw3z43o
  54. https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/2003488/uk-disneyland-project-scrapped-100m-debt
  55. https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/07625574/insolvency
  56. https://www.serlecourt.co.uk/news/article/judgment-handed-down-in-re-london-resort-co-holdings-ltd-2024-ewhc-3287-ch
  57. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-11-08/london-s-2-5-billion-disney-style-theme-park-sued-by-paramount
  58. https://www.thegazette.co.uk/notice/4744650/
  59. https://www.mills-reeve.com/publications/cva-supervisor-failed-to-comply-with-obligations/
  60. https://www.taylorwessing.com/en/insights-and-events/insights/2025/02/riu-english-court-terminates-theme-parks-cva-for-irremediable-breaches
  61. https://www.plumjobs.co.uk/resources/news/from-ambition-to-liquidation-the-fall-of-the-2.5/1226/
  62. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/mar/26/plastic-t-rex-vs-rare-beetles-disney-on-thames-plan-london-devastate-wildlife
  63. https://www.kentonline.co.uk/dartford/news/crowds-to-rally-against-theme-park-proposals-254963/
  64. https://www.thamescrossingactiongroup.com/london-resort-theme-park-and-ltc/
  65. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-kent-60766280
  66. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-kent-60226992
  67. https://variety.com/2022/film/news/paramount-theme-park-u-k-1235218747/
  68. https://www.endsreport.com/article/1751279/developer-500-home-london-resort-theme-park-withdraws-application
  69. https://nsip-documents.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/published-documents/BC080001-000766-7.5%20Economic%20and%20Regeneration%20Statement.pdf
  70. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/travel_news/article-9102393/New-image-London-Resort-released-claims-generate-50billion-UK-25-years.html
  71. https://www.experienceuk.org/blog/%25C2%25A33-5b-london-resort-dream-collapses-amid-debt-and-environmental-challenges
  72. https://www.themeparkinsider.com/flume/201912/7150/
  73. https://www.themeparkinsider.com/flume/202312/9952/
  74. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/03/21/dartford-disneyland-calls-administrators-kent-theme-park-plan/
  75. https://www.kentonline.co.uk/dartford/news/tram-link-touted-again-for-theme-park-review-242757/
  76. https://www.attractionsource.com/2025/07/14/universal-submit-request-for-planning-permission-for-uk-entertainment-resort/
  77. https://riderater.co.uk/8247/the-london-resort-whats-going-on/
  78. https://www.kentonline.co.uk/dartford/news/theme-park-proposals-could-add-to-crossing-traffic-woes-245940/
  79. https://www.cprekent.org.uk/news/london-resort-developer-accused-of-providing-insufficient-information-on-traffic-impact/
  80. https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest/plans-for-3-5bn-london-theme-park-pulled-due-to-transport-concerns-29-03-2022/
  81. https://www.kentonline.co.uk/dartford/news/theme-park-fallout-everyone-was-so-excited-then-they-lef-318981/
  82. https://www.bdonline.co.uk/news/high-court-orders-company-behind-35bn-theme-park-project-to-close/5133616.article
  83. https://www.casemine.com/judgement/uk/6764666e1c45974c767ad9ae
  84. https://www.serlecourt.co.uk/images/uploads/documents/Re_London_Resort_Co_Holdings_Ltd_2024_EWHC_3287_-_Judgment.pdf
  85. https://metro.co.uk/2025/01/21/company-behind-2500000000-uk-disneyland-says-london-resort-dream-is-dead-22407438/
  86. https://www.stevens-bolton.com/site/insights/articles/case-analysis-paramount-licensing-inc-v-batty
  87. https://www.thetimes.com/business-money/companies/article/is-new-development-another-ride-for-dartford-disneyland-boss-df9v8ptlm
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.