TIVETSHALL ACTION GROUP

Say NO to Turbines in Tivetshall.

Yes, they really are this big! 

 

In fact the turbines proposed are 125m or 412 ft in height to the blade tip.  The rotor blades are 90m in diameter and fit on a hub some 80m above ground level.

 

 

About Us & LATEST NEWS

An Action Group has been formed to co-ordinate opposition to the Tivetshall Wind Turbine development proposals. 

Action Group members include:

Eric & Claire Kirby (01379 677373),

Donald Carmichael (01379 608681),

Ros Hill (01379 676591 evenings & weekends)

Chris Eve / Jane Gooden (01379 676067)

Mike & Zena Tinsley (01379 741467)

and any of these may be contacted should you have any queries or should you require any assistance in responding to SNDC or Planning Inspectorate to record your own opposition to the proposals.

We can also be reached by email on enquiries@tivetshallactiongroup.com

This web site aims at providing up to date information for the local community to assist them in contributing to the principle aim of the Group…...TO OPPOSE THIS WINDFARM DEVELOPMENT WITHIN TIVETSHALL due to the totally unacceptable choice of location and its impact on the Village, surrounding villages, landscape, ecology, archaeology, amenity and public footpaths.

LATEST NEWS ITEMS

 

The web page is now up and running, subject to a few ongoing tweaks and adjustments.  You can now also email TAG with any queries or advice on: enquiries@tivetshallactiongroup.com

We have now added a link to the Dickleburgh Parish Council web site which carries information provided by our neighbouring Action Group “4Villages” (4V) fighting similar wind farm development proposals on the old Pulham airfield site by another developer (SLP) and land-owner just a few miles east of Tivetshall.  Yes, wind farms are contagious!

The number of objection letters sent to South Norfolk Planning Dept exceeded 300 relative to the recently refused planning application to erect a test mast at Tivetshall to measure wind speed .  Thank you all for your support to preserve our countryside and our living environment.  Your continued help is again called upon now that Enertrag have appealed this decision and when they will inevitably submit their full application for the six turbine development; and this is expected by November 2008.

TAG and 4V maintain  pressure on the land-owner; Huntingdon Freemen’s Charity.  Their local newspaper (The Hunt’s Post) carried an article expressing the anger of Tivetshall residents to those Huntingdon people benefiting from this charities’ potential profits.   They talk of “Nimby’ism…...but this takes the biscuit….. Put wind farms in someone else’s back yard!!  Huntingdon Council recently refused a similar development in their own area and this is their local councillors, some of whom also happen to serve as trustees to the charity.

A public meeting was held  by Gissing Parish Council on Tuesday 8th April at 7.30 p.m. to discuss the turbine development application by Enertrag.   Surprise—Enertrag were actually represented—having failed to appear at either Hempnall or Tivetshall Public Meetings to which they were invited.  Their representative, Terry Chapelhow, thought they had been invited to present their case to a select number of Gissing PC councillors—not a public examination.  However, the gathering was relatively small (some 30 +); rather different to the 140 which met at the Tivetshall meeting.

The Enertrag presentation was somewhat predicable in that they depicted the proposed development in quite glowing terms—how on earth can we do without it and that there will be absolutely no problems arising from its presence in this delightful area of Norfolk—and if there were any complaints arising, of course they would deal with them immediately, even if this meant turning off a turbine—do you believe they would? 

We were also re-assured by SNDC District Councillor (Keith Weeks) that the SNDC Environmental Health Dept would immediately take steps to close down the turbines should they present a nuisance to local residents.  It’s a pity that same department has been so slow in taking action over a disgraceful  situation within Tivetshall Village, reported by many residents over the past 8 months or more repeatedly, concerning a lack of animal husbandry and appalling “farm” conditions—a case that has only recently led to “Norfolk Trading Standards”, rather than Environmental Health taking steps to remove surviving animals to a safe haven in May 2008.  Attempts have been made by NTS and SNDC to partially deal with contamination on the fields and entering the watercourse and have had some success in preventing effluent seeping into parishioner’s adjacent gardens but still no signs of any longer term clean-up of the fields backing onto houses.  Spoil heaps; one of which is said to be contaminated, remain on site presumably leaching further effluent into the ditch systems surrounding as they are not bunded as promised by SNDC.  However, we have been assured that animal carcasses and body parts have now been removed (but to where we do not know as the farmer was left to deal with this himself) but still no further action or even answers to villagers’ constant calls of concern from SNDC Environmental Health—so much for their immediate action promised by Mr Weeks.  DEFRA, The Environment Dept and the RSPCA have also been completely lacking in their response.

We do not accept these assurances of action against turbine nuisance

Would you with rotting carcasses and contaminated materials the other side of your garden fence?

The Gissing meeting was assured by Enertrag that a planning application for the Tivetshall development would not be submitted until November 2008 at the earliest—but the damage is already done!  Any prospective house buyer in the area will undertake a planning search and already find from the SNDC planning web site that they could have a wind farm adjacent, but Enertrag maintain this will not influence house values or sale periods—this response is nonsense.  Enertrag also confirmed there will be no compensation for any losses arising as the majority of the population of the UK actually want sustainable energy and Enertrag re-affirmed this is not an issue to be considered under Planning legislation.  We are not convinced that this natural acceptance applies to many people anticipating wind farms on  the door-step of their new homes.

Enertrag stated that their selected sites at Hempnall and Tivetshall had been carefully chosen in view of their specific suitability for the placement of wind turbines due to their preferred situation with regard to potential air traffic disturbance, wind availability and general environment.  It is more likely they were approached by land-owners taking the opportunity for a diversified income stream and nothing to do with “suitability of the site”.  They seem to have missed the point that Norwich Airport has lodged an objection on safety grounds and that the site contains potential Roman and Medieval artefacts and well-used public rights of way and a thriving ecology.  However, they did state they would relocate individual turbine locations to miss any historic locations if necessary following a “desk-top” study as part of the EIA.  So much for their specific selection of this site.

On the question of wildlife preservation, Enertrag confirmed this was again “catered for” by a study already commissioned and underway by ECON (Norwich Research Park), in the form of an ecological report being prepared.  They had apparently already undertaken a winter period study and this would be followed by a similar study during Spring and Summer.  Have any of you ramblers, dog-walkers and horse-riders seen evidence of these people stalking our fields as long ago as the winter of 2007—no, neither have we.  However, since Enertrag’s recent “Exhibition” within Tivetshall (12/06/08) we have encountered the odd survey visit although they have confirmed they are restricted in carrying our complete studies (of the bat population for example0 due to budget constraints preventing night surveys.  Did they not realise you don’t see many bats flying during the day?

The Gissing meeting attendees were also requested to communicate to Enertrag with information on any particular wildlife species seen in the area of the proposed development so they could consider the impact of the development and introduce mitigation measures—We would rather this be communicated directly to SNDC Planners to ensure independent  assessments are made and obligations of the scoping opinion met.

The question of continued use of public rights of way was not considered a problem by Enertrag—the area would need to be closed “for safety reasons” when the turbines were being erected by crane and this would only take a couple of days per turbine.  However, the fact that construction of the very considerable turbine foundations and service roads etc., and that overall completion would take approximately 6-8 months was not considered a problem by Enertrag, even though the main construction access point was confirmed as Yarmouth Dock (A47), A140 south and turn right into Moor Road, Shimpling with vehicles of some 45m length under escort, and directly through the gates into the site (Patten Lane).

Would you wish to walk your dog or ride your horse in this construction site environment?

The truth is you will not be allowed access during the construction period for the area will be contained for safety reasons.

We were also assured that photographic montages of the proposed development site would be produced, from any view point required, which would apparently allay our fears of the visual impact of these 125m high turbines on the landscape that we currently enjoy—the general view was that we liked it as it was thank you.

LEAVE IT ALONE.

SNDC Planning Officers have issued their Scoping Opinion Response to Enertrag (UK) Ltd listing all aspects to be included with any subsequent planning application for the six turbines proposed.  This is provided for information on a separate page on this web site—a well structured and comprehensive response in our view—let’s hope that Enertrag’s EIA will do it justice in providing the in-depth study called for.

The SNDC Planning Committee met on the evening of 22/04/08 in regard to the full planning application for the 60m test mast and this was unanimously rejected on the grounds of failure to comply with ENV 1 (Visual Intrusion of the Landscape) and ENV8 (Development in the open countryside).  It was also considered that the potential over-riding requirements of PPS22 and UTL13 (in favour of sustainable development in the National interest) did not apply, as this application was  submitted as a stand-alone development which provided no renewable (or any) energy arising from its use and was not deemed to be linked to any subsequent wind turbine development, discussions upon which objectors were not permitted to put forward—they can’t have it both ways!

Well done to all who supported our cause and thank you.

That was only round-one and we did not expect Enertrag to up sticks and disappear—that is not the way of wind farm development speculators.  They have now submitted their appear against refusal for the test mast (18/06/08) and are proceeding with preparations for their full Planning application for the 6 turbines anyway once they have completed the necessary Environmental Impact Assessment—and they have declared that this application will be made by November 2008.

Glossy brochures were distributed 28/05/08 to some (but not all) Tivetshall households by Enertrag publishing their case for the development and advising of the first of two proposed public exhibitions to be held at Tivetshall Village Hall on Thursday 12th June 2008 between 3.00 and 8.00 p.m.  All were invited to find out more about their proposals and have any concerns or questions answered by representatives of Enertrag and their “independent” consultants—there was a fair turn-out spread over the afternoon and residents took the opportunity of raising queries and expressing opposition to Enertrag’s representatives directly—but this of course falls on deaf ears. 

The credibility of this “public consultation” process lost some of its edge when people noticed that house to house deliveries by this sustainable energy company were made using a new 4x4 “gas guzzler”.  Well done, Enertrag.

The leaflet delivered included photographs of their operational wind farm at North Pickenham, Norfolk presumably by way of example.  Pity all these photographs were taken at considerable distances from the turbines—go there and take a look for yourself and appreciate the real scale against the landscape. 

Let’s hope that their photo-montages to be produced within the EIA will be more realistic in proportional distance and representation than those displayed at the Tivetshall Exhibition which were clearly not representative at all of that to be expected.  TAG have since been invited to propose photo-montage sites for Enertrag’s consultants to work from and this we have done with a request that these photo-montage presentations are provided in full A3 or A4 frame size, taken with a 75mm lens etc., in accordance with recognised advice, and not the normal distorted narrow horizontal views preferred by developers and which severely misrepresent what will in fact be viewed should development proceed.

PLANNING APPEAL—TEST MAST

TAG has now concluded its response to Enertrag’s Grounds of Appeal against the test mast refusal and will be issuing this to the Planning Inspector week commencing 14th July 2008.  Further information and guidance on Planning Appeals procedure will be provided on an additional page on this site, assessable from a link in the side panel.  Further objections must be made to the Inspector by the deadline of 30th July 2008 (6 weeks after Enertrag’s appeal was lodged).

 

Watch this space for further developments!

 

Sorry about the size of this picture but you can copy and expand if you wish.

 

It demonstrates the relative size of a 125m turbine with Hempnall Church and other everyday things like trees and cars to scale—frightening (re-produced from the Hempnall website).

 

Refer to SHOWT; the Hempnall Action Group established to oppose Enertrag’s turbine proposals for this South Norfolk area of natural beauty where their Planning Application has now been lodged and is being actively opposed.

 

Please held with the Hempnall Campaign if you can—they have similar problems to us opposing this further development proposed by Enertrag.  Where will the next application be made—in your village?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Congratulations to all those working for SHOWT and the residents of Hempnall on the refusal by South Norfolk District Council Planning Committee on 5th August 2008 to grant Enertrag (UK) Ltd planning permission for the erection of seven 125m turbines on the outskirts of this South Norfolk village.

 

WELL DONE TO ALL