TIVETSHALL ACTION GROUP

Say NO to Turbines in Tivetshall.

Just one of the six foundations required for a 125m turbine development proposed which will decimate the local landscape. 

 

Bear in mind these six foundations will be linked by extensive concrete service roads and hardstanding areas for maintenance cranes and vehicles and trench excavations for cable distribution to a local electrical substation to feed the National Grid — NO THANKS.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes, this is the size of a 125m high turbine—a Boeing 747 passenger jet would comfortably fit within the rotor diameter.  Let’s hope one never tries it for size?

Home

A local Action Group has been formed to co-ordinate opposition to the Tivetshall Wind Turbine development proposals on land within the Parish of Tivetshall St Mary, Norfolk, (for more details see “About Us”). 

This follows from an application by Enertrag (UK) Ltd., a Diss based subsidiary of a German turbine manufacturer, for a “scoping opinion” relative to a potential development of six 125m turbines on the outskirts of Tivetshall St Mary village.  South Norfolk District Council (SNDC) was obliged to respond to this, following contact with interested parties, listing requirements for an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) which would accompany any subsequent planning application for the development.

Subsequently, Enertrag submitted a full planning application for the erection of a “temporary” 60m high meteorological test mast in the area with which to record wind speeds over a period of up to 3 years.

This application was refused at the Planning Committee Meeting of 22nd April 2008,

but Enertrag immediately lodged an appeal (18th June 2008)

This appeal was upheld by the Planning Inspector 12th January 2009

Following normal process, this appeal against refusal was debated at an informal hearing on Tuesday 16th December 2008 and  the Inspector’s decision to grant the appeal has been recently received.  Despite the nature of his decision, it has to be said that the hearing itself was conducted fairly by the Inspector who had clearly researched the points raised by each of the parties and raised very searching questions to clarify his understanding of the disputed planning application.  The Inspector’s report is contained later.  Whilst being obviously disappointed in the inspector’s decision, it was not totally unexpected, and we were pleased that we had delayed Enertrag’s programme for some 8 months and that much contained within the wording of the Inspector’s report gave comfort and even in some cases provides ammunition for our use relative to the full planning application for six 125m turbines promised by Enertrag imminently.  Enertrag have made it known via the local press that the meteorological test mast will be erected within the next month.

Enertrag (UK) Ltd, the proposed developer, is still apparently finalising the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) required for a full planning application for the six turbines themselves and this is expected to be submitted in June 2009.

 

This web site aims to provide up to date information for the local and wider community to assist objectors in contributing to the principle aim of TAG which is……

TO OPPOSE INDISCRIMINATE ONSHORE INDUSTRIAL WINDFARM DEVELOPMENT

WITHIN UNSUITABLE & POPULATED LANDSCAPES.

TAG and most other like-minded opposition groups are not against the principles of sustainable energy creation; on the contrary we welcome it, but in the right form and in the right place.  Blighting our beautiful landscape and village outskirts with these industrial machines, visible for miles around, is unacceptable and generally contravenes all that good Planning Guidance has attempted in the past to preserve.  This safeguard is now being undermined by central Government in an endeavour to reach their over-ambitious targets for 10% sustainable energy in the UK by 2010 increasing to 20% by 2020.  There are now moves from within some quarters of Government to raise this target still higher to 80% by 2050.  In so doing they are riding roughshod over the views of local populations throughout the country by stipulating that Planners and Planning Inspectors effectively downgrade the requirements of previously established Planning Policy by instructing, via Planning Policy Statement 22 (2004), (PPS 22) that this wider environmental and economic national need to meet these targets should be a material consideration in preference to previous constraints on such developments (i.e. objections from within the community).

Please follow the links provided left to obtain further information.

 

THANKS TO ALL WHO HAVE ALREADY RESPONDED TO THE SCOPING & TEST MAST PLANNING APPLICATIONS—OVER 300 LETTERS OF OBJECTION WERE SENT TO SNDC  BY THE CLOSING DATE FOR COMMENTS OF 17th APRIL 2008, CLEARLY EXPRESSING WIDESPREAD LOCAL OPPOSITION TO THIS UNWELCOME PROPOSAL AND WHICH WERE CLEARLY LISTENED TO BY THE PLANNING COMMITTEE IN THEIR REJECTION OF THE PROPOSAL.

 

 LOCAL OPINION IN SUFFICIENT NUMBERS DOES COUNT IF PRESENTED IN AN ORDERLY AND PROFESSIONAL FASHION.

 

THE MAIN BATTLE HAS YET TO COMMENCE, STARTING WHEN ENERTRAG’S FULL PLANNING APPLICATION IS SUBMITTED AND WE MUST BE READY AGAIN TO RESPOND AT THAT TIME IN EVEN GREATER STRENGTH.

 

Test mast erected 25th February 2009—See “News” section