Representation by The Personal Executors of Lady Sarah Margaret Clutton (The Personal Executors of Lady Sarah Margaret Clutton)
- Date submitted
- 6 November 2023
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
Dear Sirs RE: The Duke of Norfolk, Angmering Park Farms LLP, Trustees of The Bernard 16th Duke of Norfolk’s 1958 Settlement Reserve Fund, Trustees of The Angmering Park Estate Trust, The Personal Executors of Lady Sarah Margaret Clutton Rampion 2 Offshore Windfarm – Development Consent Order I write in regard to the application for a development consent order and compulsory purchase order relating to the Rampion 2 Offshore Wind Farm which was submitted by Rampion Extension Development Limited on 10 August 2023. Savills are instructed by the Duke of Norfolk, beneficial owner of the Arundel Estate and the Trustees of various Trusts as set out above. Unfortunately, and despite our best efforts, we seem to be at an impasse with Carter Jonas (CJ) who are the agents acting on behalf of the Rampion 2 project. Indeed, we would suggest that no real progress nor meaningful negotiation has now been made for several months. The main issues with how this project is being dealt with (amongst many others) are that: My clients are not being offered reasonable compensation terms and when we have tried to negotiate fair terms (as would normally happen in such matters) we have been met with blanket resistance, it seems to us that CJ have no intention of altering or improving their initial offer. For example, we have tried to negotiate land values with CJ and they have thus far refused to move on this and have disregarded any valid comparisons to recent, similar large infrastructure projects such as Rampion 1, and the Esso pipeline project. My client’s concerns are not being listened to and taken on board and the lines of communication of The Rampion project team and their consultants are confusing and misleading. For example, alternative routes have been proposed, but have not been properly evaluated by RWE and their agents and where they have been adopted there are still significant information gaps around the development giving rise to concern about various estate enterprises and businesses. Emails and requests for information have remained unanswered, such as the locations of permanent manhole access points and associated access rights required through extended private routes through the estate which will cover some significant distance from the nearest public highway. Some areas of the route corridor through the estate are extensive, far wider than the standard construction corridor, which could threaten the nationally significant conservation project know as the ‘The Peppering Project’, further detailed discussion may mitigate these concerns but thus far this has not occurred. Insufficient information has been provided to us / our clients for them to be able to make an informed decision as to whether or not to sign the Key Terms that have been issued by CJ and when we have asked for more information or greater explanation, none has been forthcoming. For example, myself and the other agents acting for landowners along the route requested copies of the draft legal agreements so we could fully advise our clients. These have only recently been provided to some clients and demonstrate that the Key Terms document produced by CJ was insufficient, lacked detail and could not be signed and would have resulted in protracted or abortive negotiations with solicitors. The Rampion 2 project team are not willing to cover the cost of landowners’ proper and reasonable professional fees, this has been apparent at the consultation stage and remains a concern as we enter negotiation of the Key Terms. There seems to be a disjointed approach to how landowners and agents are being informed of matters and a consistent lack of detail. Whilst my clients and I will continue to engage with RWE and CJ in order to try and achieve the best outcomes for the affected land, we felt we must make a representation to you so that you aware of the poor engagement and lack of detailed meaningful consultation that has thus far taken place between the Rampion 2 project and our client. Yours faithfully Guy Streeter MRICS FAAV Director RICS Registered Valuer