The original hiccup that 'allowed' a potential judicial review of the planning process was with the 'process' of the original application rather than the content.
I do not think that a revised application can be refused and with an 'established' company providing the service this will be a much easier 'regulation route' as Sloanes are well versed with regulations of both operating aircraft and landing sites.
I am not sure what they plan to do about parking as the original heliport has considerable space for this, and perhaps the nearby Sainsbury site will play a part in this.
I am pleased this is going ahead, as the ISSCO had really shot themselves in both feet over all this and lost the
PR battle big time. The Tresco element of the service will cover the costs and in fact they do not even have to use St Marys as Tresco could provide a quick boat service across the sound thus saving both airport fees and dealing with an expensive overhead of the main airport.
The real factor is how the Steamship co have been seen to ignore popular public opinion, and tried to utilise 'bully boy' tactics to force someone to use the Lands End facility.
Anybody with a grain of flying knowledge knows that with all the 'aids' in the world a 400 ft airfield in a fog prone location can be unreliable and also uncertain for schedules. That is why BEA relocated to PZ as soon as possible, and why the service from there was a revelation of reliability and convenience; and so it will be again. I wish them well and look forward to 'calling' PZ Heliport again on the radio and hope they get the old 118.1 freq back.