Norfolk Vanguard

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.

Norfolk Vanguard

Received 10 September 2018
From Colin King

Representation

The proposed Vanguard substation site at Necton poses some problems in my opinion.

Vattenfall and Orsted are developing offshore wind farms of similar scale, at the similar time, and in the same region. The cable corridors could be shorter if they exchanged their substation locations.

The Necton site in 1996 was subjected to a F16. plane crash, with all the associated contamination problems. It was decontaminated at the time with the understanding the soil would not be disturbed below 1m. Vattenfall were unaware of this, until just before submitting their application.

Vattenfall disregarded 3 holiday let businesses, and 2 caravan sites in Necton, also walkers and dog walkers, rating them as of negligible value.

The Necton site is on high ground, regarded as a lightening strike area. The soil is deep clay, in arable production, only because of it's extensive land drain network. The drainage water all passes through Ivy Todd, sometimes flooding the road and houses. All Dudgeon's substation runoff is handled by this small stream. Vattenfall intends to add theirs to the same stream. We, I assume have riparian rights to the stream, as it's on our boundary.

We at Ivy Todd Farm, had a visit by 2 Vattenfall representatives. They suggested tiered tree planting between the substation, and our land. No planting appears on any diagrams or maps in the application. We would value an agreement regarding noise restriction over our land, which we told the representatives, is intended for a future, recreational diversification project.

No alternative sites have been described, as less suitable than the Necton connection point. Two alternative areas, (Fransham and Scarning) directly back along the cable corridor, were described to Vattenfall, one with a technical report. the Scarning land was for sale, and the Fransham land owner was willing to sell.
With no alternatives, the Necton site must work, no matter how many problems are discovered.

Background noise levels appear to have only been monitored for 24 hours.

The size and effect of the Borias project is being omitted from the application, although the cable corridor is being constructed to cater for both developments, to make both schemes commercially viable.

At the consultation drop-ins, alternative connection points, other than Necton, were not for discussion. Any detail regarding sound suppression, or water runoff control etc. were not available, because design detail is not initiated, until a DCO. granted.
A few moments, with a poor image, on a TV monitor is the only representation you get, of what you are going to live with. No hard copies to take away, no models, no large scale pictures, or pictures of existing examples.

The site has substantial archaeology to be avoided, and an ancient wood with associated rare bats etc.

Vattenfall states an output of 1.8 gigawatts, without qualifying, weather this is a theoretical maximum, or the actual usable output after a sensible load factor of 38% has been applied. Vattenfall uses a 1.8 gigawatts output many times to justify shortfalls in the project.