Latest On Scottish Powers EA2 & EA1N Consultation

10TH DECEMBER 2018
SCOTTISH POWER, MEETING WITH FRISTON PARISH COUNCIL

On Monday Scottish Power met with Friston Parish Council to confirm selection of Grove Wood, Friston. Also in attendance were members of the action group SASES, Suffolk County & District Councillors Russ Ranger and TJ Haworth-Culf.
This meeting was requested by Scottish Power, below is a summary of some key issues covered:

  • Scottish Power confirmed Grove Wood was the only site they would be taking though to Phase 4 consultation. 
  • They provided a summary presentation of the site selection process and reasoning for their choice (slides below). It was clear to all of the attendees nothing had changed the same reasoning was used to dismiss Broom Covert that saw the other 3 easterly proposals (sites 1, 2 & 3) dismissed. Scottish Power were not prepared to take a site forward to DCO that was in the AONB. – SPR were strongly challenged on this, effectively they have only seriously considered sites to the west all outside the AONB and they had failed to consider any brownfield options.
  • Scottish Powers presentation summary of 3.5 feedback showed a distinct lack of consideration of the views of the local authorities and of the local MP. More emphasis was given to Natural England and AONB who backed a decision to not locate in the AONBSPR were challenged on their reasoning including identifying the AONB as a ‘red’ RAG issue, which was incorrect. After prompting from SASES, SPR corrected this and confirmed the ‘red’ issue was actually due to access off the main road (shared with Sizewell power station), it was pointed out that this had not been an issue for the 2 other wind farm substations already built at Sizewell.
  • When asked why the Friston location was so near to dwellings and why a 250m rule had been used when other projects used 500m+ SPR provided no satisfactory response  – SASES asked why Royal Haskoning had used a 500m rule for the Galloper project, yet 250m was used at Friston, it was pointed out that even with a 250m buffer there were still some properties within 250m of the proposed substations at Friston.
  • When asked about economic impact, the effect on the village and effected communities and mitigation SPR confirmed these details would follow in Phase 4 when the full impact assessments were releasedAttendees made it quite clear this was too little too late.
  • SPR were challenged on the impact their proposals were having on the value and sale-ability of Friston villagers homes – numerous concerns were brought to SPRs attention, sales particulars now had to include a disclaimer about SPRs proposals, property values had already been affected, sales were struggling, retired residents were stuck, people had bought in Friston as it was quiet, peaceful and in the countryside, all this was at risk. 
  • SPR were asked about proposals for compensation. SPR had nothing in place at the moment to address blight – It was made clear this was not acceptable and that something needed to be done to help villagers that wanted to sell or move away.
  • SPR were asked why property questionnaires sent to Friston residents were misleading, they did not make it clear provision of information was voluntary  – SPR confirmed that there was NO obligation to provide detailed information about property &/or access rights over property & land.

Site Selection Decision Presentation to Friston PC 10th December 2018 >>> – Presentation Slides provided by Scottish Power

IMPORTANT UPDATE ……SCOTTISH POWER REJECT BROOM COVERT & TAKE GROVE WOOD, FRISTON TO PHASE 4 CONSULTATION!

It is with great sadness that we can confirm that Scottish Power are pressing forward with their unrelenting assault on Friston in their pursuit for profit over environment and communities. Scottish Power’s announcement takes forward a ‘worst case scenario’. Scottish Powers plans represent both needless damage to the SC&H AONB and the destruction of the character of the unassumingly, peaceful village of Friston. 

SASES have released a media release to local and national press. SASES would like to let the SOS Group (Save Our Sandlings) know that we are fully supportive of their fight for the the AONB and that we hope to work closely together to shut down this unrelenting push from energy companies to destroy the Suffolk Coast & Heaths AONB and wider rural landscape of East Suffolk.  

Click here to read SASES’s Media Release >>>

SASES – LAUNCH ONLINE DONATIONS FACILITY 

We have launched a donations page to help fight for the future of Friston and the wider Suffolk landscape. It is essential we are prepared, if needed to mount a legal challenge against Scottish Power and others who feel the AONB and East Suffolk is fair game for development. 

Donate at our ‘Chuffed’ donations page >>>

Scottish Power reject Broom Covert & take Grove Wood, Friston to Phase 4 Consultation - more info >>

Latest On Scottish Powers EA2 & EA1N Consultation

10TH DECEMBER 2018
SCOTTISH POWER, MEETING WITH FRISTON PARISH COUNCIL

On Monday Scottish Power met with Friston Parish Council to confirm selection of Grove Wood, Friston. Also in attendance were members of the action group SASES, Suffolk County & District Councillors Russ Ranger and TJ Haworth-Culf.
This meeting was requested by Scottish Power, below is a summary of some key issues covered:

  • Scottish Power confirmed Grove Wood was the only site they would be taking though to Phase 4 consultation. 
  • They provided a summary presentation of the site selection process and reasoning for their choice (slides below). It was clear to all of the attendees nothing had changed the same reasoning was used to dismiss Broom Covert that saw the other 3 easterly proposals (sites 1, 2 & 3) dismissed. Scottish Power were not prepared to take a site forward to DCO that was in the AONB. – SPR were strongly challenged on this, effectively they have only seriously considered sites to the west all outside the AONB and they had failed to consider any brownfield options.
  • Scottish Powers presentation summary of 3.5 feedback showed a distinct lack of consideration of the views of the local authorities and of the local MP. More emphasis was given to Natural England and AONB who backed a decision to not locate in the AONBSPR were challenged on their reasoning including identifying the AONB as a ‘red’ RAG issue, which was incorrect. After prompting from SASES, SPR corrected this and confirmed the ‘red’ issue was actually due to access off the main road (shared with Sizewell power station), it was pointed out that this had not been an issue for the 2 other wind farm substations already built at Sizewell.
  • When asked why the Friston location was so near to dwellings and why a 250m rule had been used when other projects used 500m+ SPR provided no satisfactory response  – SASES asked why Royal Haskoning had used a 500m rule for the Galloper project, yet 250m was used at Friston, it was pointed out that even with a 250m buffer there were still some properties within 250m of the proposed substations at Friston.
  • When asked about economic impact, the effect on the village and effected communities and mitigation SPR confirmed these details would follow in Phase 4 when the full impact assessments were releasedAttendees made it quite clear this was too little too late.
  • SPR were challenged on the impact their proposals were having on the value and sale-ability of Friston villagers homes – numerous concerns were brought to SPRs attention, sales particulars now had to include a disclaimer about SPRs proposals, property values had already been affected, sales were struggling, retired residents were stuck, people had bought in Friston as it was quiet, peaceful and in the countryside, all this was at risk. 
  • SPR were asked about proposals for compensation. SPR had nothing in place at the moment to address blight – It was made clear this was not acceptable and that something needed to be done to help villagers that wanted to sell or move away.
  • SPR were asked why property questionnaires sent to Friston residents were misleading, they did not make it clear provision of information was voluntary  – SPR confirmed that there was NO obligation to provide detailed information about property &/or access rights over property & land.

Site Selection Decision Presentation to Friston PC 10th December 2018 >>> – Presentation Slides provided by Scottish Power

IMPORTANT UPDATE ……SCOTTISH POWER REJECT BROOM COVERT & TAKE GROVE WOOD, FRISTON TO PHASE 4 CONSULTATION!

It is with great sadness that we can confirm that Scottish Power are pressing forward with their unrelenting assault on Friston in their pursuit for profit over environment and communities. Scottish Power’s announcement takes forward a ‘worst case scenario’. Scottish Powers plans represent both needless damage to the SC&H AONB and the destruction of the character of the unassumingly, peaceful village of Friston. 

SASES have released a media release to local and national press. SASES would like to let the SOS Group (Save Our Sandlings) know that we are fully supportive of their fight for the the AONB and that we hope to work closely together to shut down this unrelenting push from energy companies to destroy the Suffolk Coast & Heaths AONB and wider rural landscape of East Suffolk.  

Click here to read SASES’s Media Release >>>

SASES – LAUNCH ONLINE DONATIONS FACILITY 

We have launched a donations page to help fight for the future of Friston and the wider Suffolk landscape. It is essential we are prepared, if needed to mount a legal challenge against Scottish Power and others who feel the AONB and East Suffolk is fair game for development. 

Donate at our ‘Chuffed’ donations page >>>