EA One Offshore Windfarm – grave implications for local countryside

This is just a brief post to alert people that the East Anglia ONE consultation concerning the proposed onshore cabling from the proposed offshore windfarm  finishes on 6 March. Please respond with your concerns.

The proposal is for buried cabling – which many consider more aesthetic than  pylons, but which will be cutting a 55metre-wide swathe across a significant distance of unspoiled Suffolk coastal countryside:  from Bawdsey, across the Deben estuary, travelling north past  Newbourne, Waldringfield, tunnelling under across Martlesham creek, and turning west  on our very own Sandy Lane, where there will be a ‘Primary construction consolidation site’ whatever that might be. It will then tunnel under the A12 and travel the length of the  Finn Valley, past Little Bealings, Playford, Tuddenham St Martin, and Akenham, before  turning south to Bramford.

THis is the proposed rout of the  windfarm cabling from Bawdsey along the west side of the Deben and down the Fynn Valley. Click for larger view
The proposed route of EA One windfarm cabling from Bawdsey along the west side of the Deben and down the Fynn Valley. Click for larger view

May I repeat that this will cut a swathe 55m wide for most of the distance between Bawdsey and Bramford, with a temporary access road along the  whole length; that it will remove ancient trees (particularly, East Anglia ONE acknowledge, in Newbourne and Martlesham) and there can be no tree replanting over the top.

It may be that this will have a greater impact on portions of the route than pylons. We know of no pylon that is more than a few decades old – some of the trees what will go may have lived for centuries.

The planned works will take place over a  couple of years, from, I think, 2015. During the time there will be a considerable impact both on– and off-road. I’m not talking only of the valued  footpath infrastructure, but the fact tht these works will cross-over with the proposed Sizewell C building – and the proposed large-scale housing development at Martlesham. Rather a triple whammy, tourism-wise.

I will be responding on behalf of the people of Woodbridge as a whole. My interest will be in stressing the need for adequate mitigation (to put it mildly) and preventing as far as possible, negative impacts.  As with the SIzewell consultation, my underlying feeling is that we should not be bearing the brunt of development for the good of the nation as a whole, without the nation recognising this, putting time and effort  into ensuring minimum impact, and compensating us adequately for our kindness!

 

 the cable at Woodbridge
the cable at Woodbridge

Do contact me if there are issues you wish me to raise on your behalf.

 

Be Sociable, Share!

7 thoughts on “EA One Offshore Windfarm – grave implications for local countryside”

  1. In regard to the Woodbridge section I think we need to stress the need to reinstate the damaged landscape once the work is completed. I actually favour the underground option rather than pylons especially across Martlesham creek.
    It seems that this north/south traverse (visible from the Broom Heath view point) will be drilled rather than excavated and recovered so the damage to the surface should be less devastating. This N/S section is primarily open farm land ~ the cable must be deep enough to allow cultivation to be permitted once the wook is completed. Hedge rows and footpaths should be reinstated.
    The east/west travers from the Broom Heath turn to the Seckford golf course is going to be a mess ~ don’t see how this can be avoided unless folk wish to contest the proposed route to Bramford. Being realistic I think we have passed the point where such a challenge would be successful. So again we can only stress the need for a commitment to repair and reinstate the landscape after the work is completed.
    There are other sections of the proposed route where significant numbers of trees will be lost. As someone who is co-coordinating the campaign to Save Sandlings Forest I know the loss of woodland will upset many people.

    The Government however claims to be accepting the views expressed by the Forestry Panel’s report that woodland cover in England should be expanded. These infrastructure projects, as with HS2, will destroy many existing woodland sites along the proposed routes. I believe therefore that the developers should be required to fund the planting of trees adjacent to other woodlands within the development corridor so that the overall tree cover across our landscape is retained and where possible expanded.

  2. Received a short acknowledgement letter from the EA one consultation team ~ at least it seems the cables will be deep enough below the surface to allow for the fields to be reinstated to agricultural use once the work has been completed.

    They don’t however comment on my suggestion for tree planting to be undertaken to compensate for the loss of trees along the corridor. That is something than needs to be covered by the planning and felling license approvals.

    “Thank you for your e-mail and for voicing your support for the undergrounding of the cables.

    EAOW is committed to reinstating the landscape once construction is complete. Please refer to Chapters 24 and 29 of the Environmental Statement, which you will find on the Application Documents page of this website.

    The cables will be buried to a depth of 1.2m, deep enough to ensure that cultivation can take place once the work is complete. They will also be routed around trees as much as possible and even drilled underneath in some locations.

    Thank you for your comments, which have been noted and are valuable to the project.

    Kind regards,

    Joanna Young

    Stakeholder Manager”

  3. Thank you Clive for sharing this. I will be interested to hear what they reply to me.
    I have been briefed at SCC that it will be impossible to replant trees along the route but am very pleased by any and all suggestions that preservation of longstanding trees will feature in the minds of the excavators. I STILL don’t see why the cable can’t come straight up the estuary as was originally suggested – and have written as much to them

  4. Yes it is. But it is not going to be fast. If you go down to Martlesham Creek there is work stretching across it which I was told had to do with the cabling..

  5. Hello, we are looking at buying a home in this area so very keen to find out the latest on this, is it still happening? Is there any more recent news on it as the internet isnt bringing up much on the subject? Thank you.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*