Stoke park Residents celebrate Wind turbine decision!

Success on Wind turbine campaign

I am thrilled to announce that PfR have dropped their plans for the windfarm that was proposed on IBC land at Thorington, following an effective local campaign.

This is a summary of what they said

'Both the technical assessment PfR has undertaken and the local feedback has been invaluable in helping us hone our proposal and we are confident that this single turbine project is now the optimal design for the locality.

The project will no longer include the previously proposed turbine on Ipswich Borough Council (IBC) owned land east of Belstead and south of Pinewood. There are no plans to re-consider this in the future and the agreement with IBC will fall away at the end of the year.'

Well done to Jenny from Stop Ipswich Turbines who I have given my full support to from day one of the campaign. 

I was the only S.W. Ipswich councillor to publicly state that I was totally against the proposal being so close to homes. 

Well done to the residents who filled in and returned the survey from myself and Ben Gummer MP, proving the strength of feeling of the local people. Our first survey showed nearly a 100% of residents were against with a handful for. 

This is what a councillor should do - represent their community irrespective of their own feelings. My own is that they look beautiful and graceful in the sea or at least a few miles from people's homes and so I was more than happy to work on Stoke Park's behalf.

And well done to PfR in coming to the right decision. I have found them to be most helpful in answering my questions and it's been tough for some of their representatives when dealing with us at public meetings.

Of course there is still one turbine left which will be much further away from my ward and Babergh district but that is for other residents to deal with. I can only look after the residents who voted for me. 

However if those residents are not happy, I urge them to attend the meeting with Mr Yeo that was set up by SIT and to feel motivated by the success of the campaign so far.

I celebrated last night and hope that my residents will do the same tonight. They deserve it!

Full Council Meeting and Thorington Windfarm

Once again, the administration received questions from the public on why they refuse to nail their colours to the mast and/or do something about the majority concern over the proposed turbines at Thorington, overlooking SW Ipswich.

The leader of the council et al chose to repeat like parrots - 'the contract, which was signed by the previous administration' in other words 'it has nothing to do with us'.

Then up pops Sally Wainman, a real campaigner who challenges any party in administration and has the town in her heart, who wasn't going to let him off so lightly.

She challenged Cllr Ellesmere in a supplementary question, asking him when he was going to stop blaming everyone else and take responsibility for the wishes of the residents in SW Ipswich. Labour are in administration so what was he going to do?

Nothing is the answer.

Nothing of any consequence.

Yes, it wasn't his administration that signed the options contract. Yes, it would be hard for IBC as a council to make a stand against PfR, in fact it would be illegal. However there is nothing legally stopping any of the numerous labour councillors in SW (I am the only Tory) as individuals, in showing they truly represent their people by joining me and SIT in bringing evidence to Babergh that will show lives will be blighted.

I am the only councillor to be doing this. I have learnt much from SIT and Kessingland. This is not what I want for my residents and those in my street because it's not what they want - 92%. So I am choosing to fight hard by collecting evidence along with Ben Gummer, distributing information and attending all relevant meetings.

If other labour councillors did the same, we might get somewhere.

When asked if any labour councillors attended the latest consultation, the leader stated that they all knew the facts by now. Not true. The proposals have been changed and it was useful for me at least to see them, discuss them with PfR and have further conversations with the many residents who attended. Isn't that our job for goodness sake?!

So they do have another get out clause. If Babergh agree at their planning meeting for this to go ahead, we can expect to start hearing them blame Babergh sometime this year. In fact I can already hear it.....

Thorington Wind Turbine Latest and What we Must Do

The SW area committee met last night and top of the agenda was the Thorington Wind Farm debate and presentations from both Peter Evans, a founder of Stop Ipswich Turbines, and the developers PfR.

Ipswich Spy summarised nicely on their website as follows:

Peter Evans, the Co-Chairman of Action Group SIT, told the meeting of the damage wind turbines would do to the lives of those living within the affected area, which SIT estimates is up to 2km. He pointed out that many countries do not allow these turbines to be built within 2km of people’s homes, even in Scotland this is an advisory limit. He raised the spectre of “flicker” which has risks for those who suffer from epilepsy, migraines and even for the general public. And he explained why the noise issue was not one that should be ignored, detailing how the turbines will be more disturbing than the A14.

Susanna Miller, spokeswoman for PfR, responded, explaining to the meeting that PfR were developing their plans for a maximum of two wind turbines for the site. The design was being finalised and PfR hope to hold further consultation events before making an application to Babergh District Council. She told the meeting that the worst consequences of flicker can be mitigated during the design process and that the turbines could well be much quieter than residents expect during normal operation.

The exact location of the turbines within the site has not yet been determined, but PfR committed to informing those residents who were likely to be directly affected by the issue of flicker once they have determined which properties these will be, and advising which mitigating factors are likely to be introduced for them. PfR expect a planning application to be submitted to Babergh DC in the Spring of 2013, and an Environmental Impact Assessment will be published at the same time.

I also challenged PfR regarding the fact they stated that 'New turbines' do not make much noise, because if that's the case then are the wind turbines at Kessingland different from the ones they are planning for this site? When asked, the room filled with gasp noises when they confirmed that they did not need to submit the details of the turbines in their planning application to Babergh, just some general information that gives a good brief on maximum and minimum criteria. They also said that Kessingland had a unique problem with noise (sorry didn't they deny there was any noise here? Or have I remembered it wrong?) and that 'noise' was a 'complicated' subject.  Not sure I understood why it should be so and how they would learn lessons in order for it not to happen here.

Oh, and apparently  the Scottish windfarm blew up when it was very windy!!! That's a bit like saying 'it's Ok, my car blew up because I put too much petrol in it'!

Although i have established that  lease will not be signed with PfR until the plans are passed, what IBC has signed is the option to do so within the next 3 years.

IBC as an authority is also not allowed to be seen to go against the proposals in a public way so that leaves us councillors to try to do something.

What we CAN do;

What the Labour administration could do is ask for an expert barrister's advice on exactly how much we would have to pay out in compensation, if we withdrew the options agreement. Perhaps 5 figures is worth paying the price, as we could find ourselves way down the line paying out more in compensation for negative affects to health etc. I think the Labour administration should look into this straight away and I hereby call on them to do so. I will also ask for this by way of e-mail to the leader of the council David Ellesmere.

Secondly we must now get going in readiness for Babergh planning committee. We need proper recorded measurement of the issues in Kessingland to take as proof and shore up the case for Babergh councillors to refuse PfR planning application.

We must go forward with solutions now, not look at how we came to this point, for it's fair to say that most of the people who were FOR windfarms in principal, are starting to feel a little duped and are finding the information and experiences of the Kessingland residents a real eye opener.

So everyone who will be affected by this must start building up petitions, momentum, facts, figures for the Babergh planning application 

because leaving all that just to the developers is like trusting a spin doctor to give all sides of a story.

Watch this video about Wind Turbines

Thorington Windfarm Update on Labour Admin's refusal to support

I have been inundated with e-mails from residents about their fury over these proposed turbines..

Some are even more furious today at the comments made by councillor Sandy Martin in the local paper today. I quote;

“Before any approval is given by Babergh, PfR will have to demonstrate, via an Environmental Impact Assessment, that there will not be a significant impact on local residents.

“That is only right and, while we are confident there will be no significant effect, we are not part of the planning process.”

SIT campaigners hope that the proposals can be stopped before they reach the planning application stage.

SIT campaigner Peter Evans said: “We’d rather it not go that far. We feel there’s overwhelming evidence that it would be unbearable to people living there.

“We want Ipswich Borough Council to meet us as soon as possible so we can present our findings.”

Excuse me - 'No significant effect'?  is this for real?  And how are they measuring 'significant'? What has to happen for there to be significant? SIT can demonstrate what most normal people would call significant.

There is only one reason someone would say that - They have not listened to the evidence that was offered directly from the mouths of Kessingland residents that tells us everything we need to know about significant impact. Shame on his insensitivity.

Labour councillors are so busy trying to blame the previous administration, despite the fact that I have constantly said that we did not agree the actual site, only an in principal agreement for one to be built on a suitable site and (in capitals so that they might finally understand)

I HAVE CHANGED MY MIND ABOUT THE IMPACT THIS WILL HAVE ON OUR IPSWICH RESIDENTS AS WELL AS THOSE IN BABERGH, FOLLOWING NEW INFORMATION FROM KESSINGLAND.and SIT

I make a promise right now to the residents of SW Ipswich (and of Belstead Village, Pinewood and Thorington)  that I will help them fight this every step of the way. 

And I hope the people of Ipswich, wherever they are, care enough about their neighbours to not allow a monstrosity of  2 x 130 meter high wind turbines to be only 400 meters or so from a house. Try thinking about that in your back garden.

A poll in the EADT is showing 67% Ipswich residents are against this so we know we have them on our side.

More to come. This blog will now be dedicated only to this subject until SIT are taken seriously by all necessary parties and if you want to sign a petition then get in touch.

Thorington wind farm latest

Back in 2008 I was a part of the Conservative and Liberal Democrat executive running Ipswich Borough Council when a decision was taken to look for sites to build wind turbines. This project was proposed by our coalition partners, the Liberal Democrats, but also fitted with guidance from the Government that required local councils to find ways to reduce the carbon dioxide produced per capita in the community as well as a reduction in carbon dioxide from the councils own operations.

At the time I raised my serious concerns about any negative impact on wildlife, particularly bird life, and sought assurances on the efficacy of impact assessments and due diligence with regard to project management. The original report was not site specific, it was about the principles of providing renewable energy.

Since that report, some four years ago, work has progressed on identifying a site and finding a partner. The council chose to partner with Partnership for Renewables, who have now proposed two wind turbines on land owned by Ipswich Borough Council at Thorington Hall. Once the proposals began to crystallise, I began to become more and more concerned that my original concerns were now being ignored by the new administration running the council; Labour took power in May 2011. 

As more information has become available about the effect these turbines will have on the local community, my position has solidified against the scheme. I am sure I am not the only person who was initially in favour of wind turbines, only to become much more concerned as details of the nuisance they are causing in Kessingland become clear. We do not want a "Kessingland" problem here in South West Ipswich.

I was elected to represent the views of the people who live in Stoke Park, and that is what I intend to do. I am consulting local residents to find out what their specific concerns are and I am trying to find an escape route for Ipswich Borough Council to get out of this unwanted project.

The noise nuisance, the "flicker" and the health concerns have me convinced that the best place to build these turbines is in the North Sea. Offshore not onshore. It is time Ipswich Borough Council withdraws from this project and does not try to impose these unwanted turbines on those of us who live in the South West of the town.