The views expressed in this page do not represent those of the Planning Inspectorate. This page consists of content submitted to the Planning Inspectorate by the public and other interested parties, giving their views of this proposal.
East Anglia TWO Offshore Windfarm
Received 17 January 2020
From Alan Gooderham
“Whilst fully supporting green energy initiatives, this SPR substation siting proposal will overwhelm our village and is just too close, extending fight up to the village boundary and thus much closer than previously established norms ( eg: Bramford ). As currently proposed, this proximity and proposed scale will permanently devastate the landscape, unnecessarily destroying huge tracts of prime agricultural land: and the heritage impacts will fore ever change the character of our village and surrounding area. We depend on “ hikers and bikers” who come here for the tranquility, countryside, footpaths and wildlife. And besides such permanent loss of tourism business, the loss of these same features will halt the established flow of incoming residents - refreshing the community and critically under- pinning all local tradesmen and retail businesses. The village is a known flood risk (as EA records will confirm). SPR proposals under this heading take no account of the wider flood risks ( beyond their site ), potential loss of existing field drainage or ( in)adequacy of our current, strained ditch /infrastructure. Current substation design shows some structures ( Harmonic filters ) at 18 m. high - dwarfing the nearby church and significantly higher than at other substation. Perversely, these high noise generators are also currently planned to be positioned closest to the village boundary. In short SPR’s site selection process has been flawed; the cumulative, permanent impacts have not been fully assessed and alternative sites have not been fully evaluated. It is hard to exaggerate the landscape, heritage and economic impacts of siting such a large- scale industrial complex on our village boundary. And no amount of surround tree planting or other cosmetic mitigation can disguise this. Substation siting closer to the coast has obvious advantages to minimise cabling and position away from any community. There are brown field site alternatives. It is essential that full consideration is given to National Grid’s role in all this - as SPR’s development partner they are responsible for determining grid connection ( thus substation siting ). They are also instrumental in the wider context of other” pipeline” infra structure projects ( Sizewell C, Nautilus / Eurolink inter- connectors, other wind farm expansions),resulting in cumulative impacts on a mega- scale that must not be ignored.”