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 13 September 2018
From Miss Phoenix

Representation

Dear Sir,

Further to Vattenfall’s erroneous decision to try to locate two huge substations in the village and hamlet of Necton and Ivy Todd respectively. This letter outlines some of the obligations to this plan, starting with their own PIER report in which Vattenfall contradict themselves on numerous occasions. It is quite clear that have NOT completed a proper, thorough and legal consultation and investigation.

The residences closest to the proposed substation site at West End have NOT been consulted and completely ignored by Vattenfall. New people have moved into the area to suddenly find there is a possibility of two huge substations on their doorstep – the searches they carried out before purchasing NEVER highlighted this, which is staggering shocking because hiding something as important as the possibility of a proposed two huge substations is wrong on so many levels.
Vattenfall, therefore, cannot go ahead with this proposal, they have to go to an alternative site.

In the initial consultation, Vattenfall spouted about ONE substation for Vanguard; they NEVER said anything about the second substation Boreas. I have this in their leaflet, which only mentions ONE substation. So either Vattenfall has systematically lied from the outset or they are very bad at planning and realised ‘late in the day’ that they needed another substation. Either way, it calls in to question their transparency, competency and casts a shadow over the whole proposed project.
Vattenfall, therefore, cannot go ahead with this proposal, they have to go to an alternative site.

Independent noise experts have stated quite clearly that Vattenfall are UNABLE to get the noise from the two substations within the agreed legal limit. Vattenfall does not seem to be interested at all in the proper investigation into this important issue. If Vattenfall cannot obtain the legal limit for noise, for THEIR preferred site at Necton/Ivy Todd and they CANNOT, then they need to go to an alternative site. Vattenfall think they can bully and baffle their way to building these huge substations at Necton/Ivy Todd, throughout the whole process so far they have displayed arrogance to a staggering scale thinking they know better than the local community, some of whom were born here. Vattenfall think they know better than independent experts, they don’t.
Vattenfall, therefore, cannot go ahead with this proposal, they have to go to an alternative site.

We have heard from a Farmer who knows the soil and is actively encouraged by the Government to look after the soil; has stated that burying the cable underground will actually destroy the soil by killing the bacteria and rendering the ground useless for years if not irrevocably, catastrophic in a rural farming community that is Norfolk. Vattenfall have glossed over this FACT in their insatiable greed and desire to destroy Norfolk and Necton/Ivy Todd. Vattenfall has been told there is a cheaper and more viable alternative to go around the coast with a Marine Cable and join the Marine Cable Connector at Walpole near Sutton Bridge that DONG are putting in now. Vattenfall need to properly investigate and seriously consider this as a better, cheaper alternative option, then destroying huge swathes of Norfolk with burying cable that are ultimately destructive to the land and destroy a local community in and around Necton/Ivy Todd, which are a VILLAGE and HAMLET respectively NOT A TOWN and a VILLAGE as misrepresented in their PIER report. When I attended the last consultation meeting on the 10 November 2017, Vattenfall own employee [] admitted no-one wanted the substation anywhere and she wouldn’t want one where she lives! While [] was pleasant to talk to, her answers on the Marine Cable showed Vattenfall haven’t looked into this option at all. Vattenfall’s drive is “there is only one place for the substations and that’s Necton/Ivy Todd” Vattenfall are not interested in the slightest at looking at cheaper, viable and vastly better alternatives. Vattenfall are far too arrogant, ignorant and supercilious to even try and consider them, which is precisely why this project should NEVER be given the go-ahead because it will destroy Norfolk as a farming community by rendering the soil useless. Furthermore, they will destroy Necton/Ivy Todd a designated dark rural landscape with businesses built up around that designation and the surrounding communities irrevocably.
Vattenfall, therefore, cannot go ahead with this proposal, they have to go to an alternative site.

The National Grid would support a move to an alternative site, so Vattenfall are not bound to Necton/Ivy Todd in anyway other than by their blinded arrogance. Vattenfall cannot in any way justify their determination to destroy Necton/Ivy Todd and the surrounding communities in the slightest. Fransham Parish Council has already rejected Vattenfall planting their huge substations on Vattenfall’s proposed site. 66% of Necton/Ivy Todd residents have said NO in a resounding manner to Vattenfall’s proposal of two huge substations here, which will add 50% to the size of the village. Vattenfall does not seem to have looked at access to their preferred site, which only seriously viable option here is from the A47, as the rest of the roads around Necton/Ivy Todd community are single country LANES, completely UNSUITABLE for heavy construction traffic.
Vattenfall, therefore, cannot go ahead with this proposal, they have to go to an alternative site.

I look forward to your reply to this letter and this important matter, which I hope is given your utmost consideration. Thank you.


Yours sincerely






Miss H Phoenix