Back to list East Anglia ONE North Offshore Windfarm

Representation by Michael Mahony

Date submitted
25 January 2020
Submitted by
Members of the public/businesses
  1. I am the freehold owner and occupier of the residential and agricultural land comprised in Plots 115, 116 and 126 on the Land Plans, over which permanent and temporary rights are sought under the proposed Development Consent Orders (“DCO”). In addition it needs to be verified that no part of my land is included in Plots 117 and 117A. If it is, then the representations below in respect of Plot 126 apply equally in respect of that land. 2. I am also part of a wider group of local residents (SASES) who object in principle to the placement of the grid connection for projects EA1N and EA2 (including three substations, cable sealing end compounds, an additional pylon and associated infrastructure) next to the village of Friston. This group has made its own relevant representations along with Friston Parish Council. I adopt these in full. 3. Permanent Access Road Excessively Wide - Those representations refer to the 1700m long and 8m wide permanent access road. This road will be constructed close to the western and northern boundaries of my land. My understanding is that, aside from the delivery of four Abnormal Indivisible Loads, this road will not be used during construction and its use should be so restricted in the DCO. Further once operational the substation complex is unmanned and the road is only required for occasional maintenance and inspection using LGVs and accordingly its use should be so restricted. No justification (not least given the landscape damage and loss of agricultural land) is provided as to why this road needs to have a permanent width of 8 metres or why the Saxmundham Road (which is adjacent to the southern boundary of my land and from which it is accessed) needs to be permanently modified. 4. DCO Provides Excessive Flexibility – Those representations also refer to excessive flexibility in the DCO to determine the form of the development. This relates not just to the construction and design of the projects and their execution, but also matters such as, for example, timing. The development can commence at any time up to seven years after the DCO comes into force. Assuming that is 2021 and calculating the estimated construction and reinstatement periods for the projects on a consecutive basis, the applicant/the National Grid/their contractors may not be off site until 2035. 5. Without prejudice to those representations, I also object to the nature and extent of the rights being sought over my land. These are identical for each project and, as a result, so are my objections. The rights relate to the applicant’s plan (or rather the National Grid’s plan in the case of (a)) to: a. replace and relocate an electricity tower in the north eastern corner of Plot 115 and redirect the associated conductor to meet the cable sealing end compound; and b. to carry out modifications and traffic management measures to the B1121. 6. The bases for my objection are that: the rights being sought are more than are reasonably required for the purpose of the development; there is no compelling case in the public interest for the rights to be acquired compulsorily; and such acquisition would amount to a violation of my rights under Article 1, Protocol 1 and Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (“ECHR”). This is so, in general in respect of (a) the scope of the rights being sought; (b) the area of land subject to the rights; and (c) the duration of the rights. I make the following submissions in particular (although they do not represent the totality of my objection). Works Nos 39, 40 and 43 a. Plot 116, over which rights of temporary possession (specified in sch. 9 of the draft DCO) are sought, includes part of the residential curtilage to my home (the land to the west of the straight hedge shown on the land plan). There are no towers or conductors traversing this part of my land; b. The applicant’s agent (Dalcour McLaren) has confirmed to me in writing that: i. there will be no re-routing of the power lines that currently cross my land to the south west of towers ZX22 & ZW22; ii. no access to my land will be required from Saxmundham Road (B1121) to the south; iii. neither the applicant nor the National Grid (nor their contractors) will need to need to store plant, machinery or any materials on my land. c. Despite this, Plot 116 includes a significant amount of land to the south west of tower ZX22 & ZW22, including land close to and within my residential curtilage. This neither necessary nor proportionate; d. Neither National Grid nor the applicant appear to be able to state how long the temporary rights over Plots 115 or 116 will be required for or when (other than between 2023 and 2027) they will be conducted. Such uncertainty amounts to a disproportionate interference with my use and enjoyment of the land; e. The permanent rights sought over Plot 115 (set out at sch. 7 to the Draft DCOs) are more than are reasonably necessary or proportionate, and no adequate justification has been provided for them. For example, no justification has been provided for: i. the right to construct and install drains. There appears to be no reasonable basis for requiring drains to be constructed or installed on such a small piece of land, which has had conductors and towers traversing it for a number of years; ii. the right to install temporary welfare facilities – especially since (a) Dalcour McLaren has already confirmed that there will be no requirement to store materials on my land; and (b) Plot 116 is small and just a few metres from Plot 113, which is a large plot that the applicant already proposes to acquire as a construction site. This would be more than adequate for the provision of temporary welfare facilities. f. Further, no detail has been given in relation to the design of the replacement tower. If the DCO is granted, it should include a requirement that the design to be independently approved before it can be constructed so as to ensure that it will not adversely impact on my visual amenity, the wider landscape and the proximate heritage assets. Work No. 34 g. Plot 126, over which rights of temporary possession are sought, includes part of the residential curtilage to my home. A variety of trees, shrubs and hedges are planted and a fence is erected on this land to screen my land and particular my house from the B1121 which are necessary for the quiet enjoyment of my property. h. The scope of this work as it affects my land is unclear. Further the need for it to be conducted on my land has not been justified. The applicant has not stated how long the temporary rights over Plot 126 will be required for or when the work will be conducted. Plots 117 and 117A include/are immediately adjacent to the access to my property and the works may prevent access. This amounts to a disproportionate interference with my use and enjoyment of the land. i. Despite the impact of this work on my use and enjoyment of my land at no point has the applicant or its representatives consulted me about this element of the projects. 7. Finally, I am concerned that this DCO is being used to acquire rights and build infrastructure that will facilitate future projects, particularly grid connections for the proposed National Grid Ventures Nautilus and Eurolink Interconnector projects and the substantial expansion of the Galloper and Greater Gabbard windfarms. The cumulative impact of these projects on my land and my rights, as well as the natural and historic environment has not been properly assessed.