The Group whose aims are
'Good Governance' and 'Community Spirit'
in Sutton Bridge, Lincolnshire
Small not for profit community groups operating within ten miles of The Grange Wind Farm site, near Tydd St Mary should apply now for a grant of up to £5,000, although priority will be given to worthwhile projects within five miles.
The Community Benefit Fund, which is generated by The Grange Wind Farm located between Sutton Bridge and Tydd St Mary is in its fourth year of awarding circa £30,000 annually to fund individual projects that meet local criteria: community cohesion, young people, old people and community facilities. To date, the panel has awarded funding to enable community venues to improve their buildings (new heating, roofing, windows and doors) as well as to funds to deliver local services: a grant for a community allotment, new equipment for sports activities for older people, equipment and resources for a local pre-school, a new outdoor wildlife and environmental area, storage facilities etc.
It is unlikely that grants will be awarded for annual running costs, unless your group needs some funding for a new activity or idea.
Foundation staff can give advice relating to form filling etc or simply have a chat with you about your idea. To obtain an Application Form or discuss the project in more detail, please contact Sue Fortune on 01529 305825 or download details from the Grants Page at lincolnshirecf.co.uk. The next closing date for receipt of applications is on 1 June and then 1 January 2017.
Site preparation works have progressed and the first turbine at the Grange Wind Farm has now been assembled and erected. Works on the wind farm site will continue for a period of approximately six weeks.
The first turbine blades/sails were seen being transported on Friday 25 January at the new access road off the A1101 just before the New Holland Main Drain. They were awaiting movement to the installation site on Saturday as the weather conditions on Friday were too severe.
The photos below were taken at junction of Peters Point and Railway Lane South, Sutton Bridge (approx 1km from the site) on the morning of Saturday 26 January 2013.
Most local residents will have recently received The Grange Wind Farm 'Construction Newsletter No.1' issued by RES (Renewable Energy Systems Ltd - the company behind the construction of the Wind Farm at the Tydd St. Mary's Marsh site).
It is very unfortunate that during the Public Consultation period when meetings were held locally, very few residents of Sutton Bridge & Wingland turned out to listen to the arguments 'for' and 'against' this development. Now, this could be because you are fully in favour of wind energy or, maybe some of you were not aware of the public meetings – or perhaps, the majority just do not care and do not think it will really affect them.
However, at the time, there was quite a bit of opposition to this development and the proposal became the subject of a Public Inquiry in October 2010, the result of which was that RES were successful in their application. It could be said that the success of the application at the Public Inquiry could be based on the seeming apathy of the general public, or, did the Panel look at all the facts in depth and then come to a fair and sensible decision. The answer to that will never be known, but suffice to say, the decision was arrived at, the Wind Farm is being built and we as locals, will have to learn to live with it.
The Newsletter referred to above, makes interesting reading and is presented in such a way as to give the reader a sense of wellbeing with its 'friendly' headings e.g., 'Getting There', 'Making Tracks', 'Firm Foundations' etc etc. It also tells you that these gigantic structures – and make no mistake, the turbines being installed at Tydd St. Mary's Marsh (although not the largest this company build), are a whopping 127m (maximum tip height), and have an active life of (only) 25 years. Therefore, it does make one wonder how much profit there is going to be gushing back into the coffers of this energy company during the lifespan of these turbines. Under their heading of 'Community Benefits' they have committed themselves to ploughing back into the Community the sum of £28,000 every year – making a total donation to the local community of £700,000 over the life of the turbines.
For a company to make this kind of commitment, they must be entirely and utterly sure of the profits that they are going to be enjoying over this period of time, bearing in mind the income being paid to the landowner for the same period, and the total costs of development. No small wonder that wind farm developers are anxious to secure land for installation of these monsters – it is a money making venture. Also, a key factor to look at is how the subsidies are paid to these "alternative" or "green" energy companies and, more importantly who actually pays these subsidies. There are comments that these subsidies are NOT paid by the Government but financed entirely by increases in the prices paid by consumers (households and businesses) in their electricity bills.
See epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/22704 for more information.
The national press also carries regular stories on these subsidies (see Daily Telegraph of 25th January 2012 (available on-line) which has a story on the fact that 'Wind Farm Subsidies top £1billion a year'). All these facts and figures are in the public domain and do not require in-depth searching on the internet to unearth them. The bottom line here is that nothing is as plain as the pictures painted by these new 'green' companies. That is not to say that they are dishonest – just economical with the truth.
We are informed that this particular wind farm will have an installed capacity of 14MW and it is suggested that this will power in the region of 10,000 houses (plus/minus). This of course, will not directly benefit Sutton Bridge and the local area in reduced energy costs – the question has to be asked "when will WE see the benefit of reduced energy bills in exchange for the pollution of our landscape by these monster turbines" – an eternal question with seemingly, no answer.
Looking at the sorry saga of the turbines installed at Deeping St. Nicholas (not a RES development) we can only hope that we will not suffer the same problems – the constant whooshing as the blades turn (this only seems to happen when the wind is in a particular direction – allegedly!!!) – the prospect of the value of homes in the vicinity being reduced – who would want to buy a house close to a wind farm? Apart from these obvious problems, one would imagine that there will be quite a bit of disruption during the building phases of this wind farm. How can the transportation of such large pieces of equipment on our small roads, not cause delay and disruption to the community?
And of course, we must not forget the environmental damage to our local flora and fauna. This is briefly touched upon in the Newsletter – a small paragraph under the heading 'Making Tracks'. The first bullet point states:
The question of birds and bats being disorientated by turbines is not yet proven either way, but it stands to reason that the larger birds (geese and swans) that migrate to Britain and over-winter in our fens, could very easily get damaged in some way by the turbines – however, the jury is still out on this aspect of wind farm development, time will doubtless tell.
To date, over the last six months, planning permission has been sought by RES and approved for:
Flood Risk Assessment (H21-0921-11. Condition 17 of H21-0439-09) – Approved: 4/1/2012.
7 wind turbines to a max tip height of 127metres and associated works-approved under H21-0439-09. Amendments to include increase to area of hardstanding around control building compound and amendment to track configuration to permanent net mast. H21-0873-11 – Approved: 30/11/2011.
Erection of 7 wind turbines (approved under H21-0439-09). Amendment to crane hardstanding areas. H21-0733-11 – Approved: 19/10/2011.
Erect two temporary site calibration met masts. H21-0606-11 – Approved: 19/9/2011.
Details of scheme for improvements to North Road junction with A1101 and details of nominated representative (Conditions 20 and 26 of Appeal Decision to H21-0439-09). H21-06-7-11 – Approved: 19/9/2011.
The one known benefit of having these turbines on our doorstep is the annual fund from the Grange Wind Farm of £28,000. When the Community Benefit Fund is open, let's make sure that it is accessed by local voluntary/charity groups etc., making application for funds for projects to benefit our communities.
Finally, there is to be a further public meeting, arranged by RES, at Tydd St. Mary Village Hall on Thursday, 2nd February 2012 at 7.00 pm. The organisers suggest that you check The Grange Wind Farm website nearer the date for confirmation as this may be subject to change.
SUTTON BRIDGE CONSTITUTION CLUB - OCTOBER 12TH • 12 NOON TO 5PM
THE LINCOLNSHIRE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION.. Working in partnership with RES UK & ireland Ltd, would like to invite you to have your say on how grants of between £250 to £5000 will be distributed locally when The Grange Wind Farm is up and running. Come along and make sure your opinion counts.
Contact: Lincolnshire Community Foundation, 4 Mill House, Carre Street Sleaford
Tel 01529305825 - Email firstname.lastname@example.org
A planning application has been made to South Holland District Council, for approval to erect two 80 metre anemometer masts on the Grange Farm wind farm site by RES UK & Ireland.
The masts are to be erected to calibrate wind dynamics, prior to the erection of the seven 127 metre wind turbines.
Planning permission is also being sought to carry out road widening and improve the junction to the site on the A1101.
The following is from an email received from a local resident.
With regard to the report in your news letter concerning the above and the misinformation circulated stating that the enquiry had finished when it had not even started by Cllrs S. Booth, D. Tenant & D.Wilkinson for Long Sutton residents, and M.Booth for Sutton Bridge, what was not included was the fact that C. Brewis was in fact also one of those responsible for this.
On the 23 rd Of August, I spoke to him while he was distributing the leaflets on the Falklands Estate and asked him if he was the Author of the leaflets, he replied that with others he was, I asked him why he was saying the enquiry had finished when it was not due to start until the next day, he replied that that was what he had been informed, and that it would probably finish that day as well, he did not elaborate on who had informed him of this, I informed that the enquiry was scheduled to last for five days and asked him what he intended to do to correct this misinformation, either by printing and distributing a correcting leaflet, he said he could not do that, or by writing to the local newspapers saying what they had done, he replied they probable would not print it. he then continued to distribute the leaflets on the Falklands Estate.
I understand that he then attended the enquiry the next day when he gave a different reason for this saying that it was caused by a mix up at the printers. Hmm.
I feel that all those who were involved in this matter should be shown to be so.
Name and address supplied.
The Appeal Decision on the Inquiry opened on the 24th August has been published 15th October, 2010. The appeal has been allowed and planning permission for seven wind turbines of a maximum height of 127m has been granted for a period of 25 years on the land of Grange Farm, Tydd St. Mary Marsh, subject to certain conditions.
The result of the Public Inquiry is expected at end of October 2010, but may be subject to change.
Contrary to the information circulated in a newsletter by Cllrs Simon Booth, Dennis Tennant & David Wilkinson for residents of Long Sutton and Michael Booth to residents of Sutton Bridge, which said that the Inquiry into the proposed wind farm had ended, the proceedings in fact opened in Spalding today, August 24th, at 10.00am.
This misinformation may have deterred many residents from both towns from attending the hearing which is taking place in the Council Chamber at South Holland District Council Offices.
Residents who did attend and who had a chance to speak were told that if other members of the public still wished to speak, they could do so on the remaining days of the Appeal which is due to run until Friday, with a summing up taking place on Tuesday, August 31st, after the Bank Holiday.
The hearings commence at 9.30 and at the beginning of the meetings, the names of people who wish to speak are listed and they will be given an opportunity by the Inspector to speak.
'...And one of the reasons so many of Britain’s wind turbines turn so little is that the subsidy doesn’t depend on where you put them. Developers like building wind farms in places such as Lincolnshire, where the countryside is dull [who says?] and there is relatively little public opposition. Unfortunately, there is also relatively little wind in Lincolnshire...'
Andrew Gilligan in The Telegraph 13th June 2010
Appeal by: RES UK & Ireland Ltd.,
Application No. H21-0439-09
Inspectorate Reference: APP/A2525/A/10/2125075/NWF
It has been confirmed that an Inspector has been appointed by the Secretary of State to determine this appeal and that a Public Enquiry into this appeal will open on Tuesday, 24th August, 2010 at 10 am in The Council Chambers at the Council Offices, Priory Road, Spalding, Lincs., PE11 2XE.
The Inquiry is expected to last for five days.
The progress of the appeal can be made by visiting the SHDC Planning Portal web-site at www.pcs.planningportal.gov.uk/pcsportal/casesearch . You will need to enter the Inspectorate appeal reference number quoted above to open the correct appeal details.
For all those who have yet to write their letter of objection to the Tydd St. Mary Wind Farm, below is a proforma letter with points that you may wish to use. Please send your letter as soon as possible, to reach the Inspectorate by 1st June, 2010 and of course to send three copies too.
The Planning Inspectorate
Temple Quay House
2 The Square
Bristol. BS1 6PN
Planning Appeal by RES UK & Ireland
Application No: H21-04439-09
Inspectorate Ref: APP/A2525A/10/2125075/NWF
This is a strong objection to the proposed development at Tydd St Mary Marsh for the erection of seven 127m high wind turbines.
• The Plan totally disregards the SHDC Local Plan and Supplementary Planning Guidance on wind energy;
• There are proposals for further wind farms in the Wash by Centrica for a maximum capacity of 650MW. This development pales into insignificance in terms of relative wind energy produced but it will create massive environmental damage;
• The size of each turbine (127m – twice the height of Nelson’s Column), will make a huge and lasting appalling visual blot on the landscape.
• There is well-documented evidence of noise nuisance detrimental to both the physical and mental health of residents – low frequency humming from the hubs and ‘swoosh and bang’ from the blades. The developers show no regard for either environmental impact or for the cumulative effects of turbines on local residents.
• Developers seem to be more interested in obtaining massive subsidies than in doing anything ‘green’, The fact that wind turbines are inefficient to operate producing less than 27% of their potential annual capacity does not seem to matter to them.
• In Denmark and Germany they are already demolishing wind farms because they have proved to make little contribution to energy problems.
• Farmers whose land is acquired for development are bought off by the developer and money is offered to the local community. These factors introduce issues that make any rational discussion impossible
• Since any energy generated by wind turbines cannot be stored, when the grid is at capacity, surplus energy has to be burned off by activating the turbines, even on a still day.
• The area is a wildlife habitat for birds, other forms of wildlife and bats in particular. Once the turbines are built it will be of no consequence that the developers say now that they will take ‘appropriate steps’ – the damage will have been done.
To grant this application would have disastrous consequences: it would be the first of many such proposals by speculative developers to ring the Wash between Peterborough and Boston.
3 copies enclosed
South Holland District Council have informed the public that RES UK & Ireland Ltd., have made an appeal to The Secretary of State against the decision to refuse planning permission to erect the seven wind turbines on land at Grange Farm, Tydd St. Mary.
The appeal will be determined by an Inspector appointed by The Secretary of State following a Public inquiry which will be held at the SHDC Council offices on a date to be confirmed.
This area of the Fens and South Holland are fast becoming one huge power station. At the rate wind turbine farms are being planned and erected in this area, we will soon be in a forest of them unless you act now and lodge your objection. There is no way the visual impact of these monsters can be camouflaged in our distinctive flat Fenland landscape and they would be seen in whichever direction you look. In addition, there is the known noise disturbance that these monsters generate, despite assurances to the contrary from the operating companies.
When wind turbines do produce electricity the National Grid can only take a certain amount. The surplus is stored in the wind turbines own reserves, that is why on a windless day you can see the turbines rotating. They are using their own stored power source, which makes people believe, mistakenly, they are still producing power. The majority of wind turbines only produce approximately 25% of their proposed capacity; some produce less than half that amount. Denmark and Germany are already decommissioning their wind turbine farms as they are not as economic as was supposed.
It was reported in the national press that on the coldest day of the year so far, in January 2010, when Britain came close to running out of gas, only one tenth of one per cent of our electricity was produced by wind power.
You now have a last opportunity to voice your views by writing to the following address:
The Planning Inspectorate
Temple Quay House
2 The Square
Bristol, BS1 6PN
The appeal reference number APP/A2525/A/10/2125075/NWF must be quoted in all correspondence to the Inspectorate (letters to the Inspectorate MUST be sent in Triplicate, other wise they do not count), and must be forwarded to arrive there before 1st June, 2010.
On the evening of 2nd March, members of Bridge Watch and three Sutton Bridge Parish Councillors attended the District Council’s re-assessment of the RES’ application to build 127 metre monster wind turbines at Tydd. Residents from Tydd Gote, Tydd St. Mary and Sutton Bridge were also present.
Most notable was the atmosphere in which this genuine debate was conducted as compared with that which exists when our own Parish Council meets. Here, with one significant incoherent exception,
were councillors being articulate and constructing sentences that could be understood.
The chairman, in spite of being obviously against the turbines because they obstructed a view of our large skies and gave little economic benefit, presented a very sound framework for discussion, drawing a clear distinction between broad principle and detail; this enabled councillors to present their points of view in a carefully balanced way.
The performance of Roger Gambba-Jones was an object lesson in how to chair a council meeting. A chairman is responsible for both how a meeting is structured and the way in which it proceeds: Roger Gambba-Jones’ whole demeanour and measured fairness ensured that all contributions to the debate were listened to and received with respect.
It did not escape councillors’ notice that the RES photographs both exaggerated the way that hedges and trees might hide the monster turbines and reduced their size to appear to be something in the far distance.
The RES representative made a hurried speech that had a lot of words in it but which was totally unmemorable. Craig Jackson’s speech, in contrast, was measured and rational. He pointed out that Val Gemmell who had presented a petition containing 388 names in favour of wind turbines lived in Holbeach and was therefore not likely to be affected by the current proposed installation. The names were collected in Long Sutton—equally somewhat distant from Tydd. Wind turbines are an interesting concept in principle - it’s the detail of their construction and function that poses problems.
After the motion to reject the RES application was carried unanimously, Ms Gemmell told Craig that there were no hard feelings - she said that John Hayes had said there was no one in favour of ‘wind farms’ and she just wanted to prove him wrong. Such is the level of political debate amongst some in South Holland.
The Turbine Proposal was rejected on the following grounds:-
It remains to be seen whether RES will appeal - a costly business - or cut their losses and impose themselves and their so-called green credentials elsewhere.
Being a money-making concern, will RES make an appeal? Will the conduct of any appeal be driven by the insane dash for green energy at any cost to the environment and people’s living standards?
John Hayes, Member of Parliament for South Holland & The Deepings
I would like to thank you for your eloquent presentation at the Wind Turbine Update meeting in Tydd St Mary Village Hall on Friday 12th February 2010.
What proved to be most alarming was that the decision over the Wind Turbines at Tydd has only been deferred pending a so-called Landscape Capacity Survey; if the result of the survey is to permit the planning application for the building of these particular monsters to go ahead it will set a precedent and they will be marching all over this beautiful silent fenland area and, since money (rather than anything green or ecological) is the driving factor, the question will never be asked—when is enough enough?
What also came out of the meeting was firstly that the subsidies for off-shore wind turbines do not compensate the ‘developers’ (proof that they’re thinking only of their profits) for the additional costs involved... not that I would want the ocean horizon to be blighted by the sight of these modern day dark satanic mills either. Secondly, that District Council planning decisions are determined not by anything rational but by a fear of having to make costly appeals—so they cave in... anything to save the cost of an appeal.
There was a certain sense of hopelessness in the audience over both wind turbines and the proposed nearby incinerator. People are becoming well aware that Sutton Bridge and area is regarded as a dumping ground for anything unpalatable, partly, it was suggested, because the ‘developers’ (despoilers) know that Fenland people are too nice. Or apathetic. Or just intent on getting on with their own peaceful lives in a landscape they love. Both landscape and peace will be things of the past without them noticing it. And the ‘developers’ will have moved on leaving their mess behind them.
John, you said you were a romantic and had a real feeling for this flat, wide-skied, landscape; for aesthetic reasons we should rise up against the desecration of the landscape. Exactly what I think. Coming up on the train from Cambridge, after passing through the little hills of Hertfordshire, as the landscape flattens out and the sky enlarges, I feel as though I have come ‘Home’. I have not had the feeling of ‘coming home’ like this since 1959 when I left the house where I was born to live in many other places. It irks me that my home is being invaded by meaningless monsters and noxious incinerators dressed up as something in a ‘farm’ or a ‘park’. Let’s abandon this twist of words and call these machines just what they are. And let’s start realising that our landscape is being despoiled, its silence destroyed, that our daily ordinary comings and goings are being snarled up by huge lorries contaminating the air and clogging up the roads.
John, how do we convince people of the aesthetic argument? This is crucial, it seems to me.
To keep our human frame going, we are fed in three ways: firstly by the food we eat; secondly by the air we breathe; but thirdly, and most importantly, by the impressions we receive through our senses, the things we feel and hear and touch and see. We can make choices about the food we eat and whatever we eat—healthy or junk—it will keep us going for varying lengths of time; we can modify our breathing patterns—the more exercise we take the more we become conscious of and regulate our breathing patterns the better we will feel; but without impressions we die. The problem is that we exist in impressions and therefore take them for granted; so concerned are we with earning a living and going about our daily business that unless we take time out to look around us we stop noticing the broken windows, the stuff that’s dumped under hedges, the ill-designed buildings that litter our towns, the decay and the mess of industrialisation disguised as ‘park’ or ‘farm’.
John, if being a romantic is to notice the passage of the seasons, to stretch the eyes across the landscape, to look up into a night-sky to be able to see the stars free from light pollution, to be able to breathe freely and sniff fresh air without the thought that what you’re breathing contains noxious chemicals, to watch the gulls fly inland up the Nene in the morning and out again at night—then I’m a romantic, an unashamed romantic.
Keith Hargreaves echoed my feelings when he spoke at the meeting of standing in the middle of a field near a wind turbine recalling how silent it used to be there.
The question is, how to stimulate the growth of this attitude of mind to such an extent that people rise up and shout ENOUGH! ENOUGH! Perhaps what is needed is a heightened sense of environment (and, thereby, of community) through a more developed use of the five senses, maybe just through an enlivened walk about one’s home-town sufficient to say, "That’s beautiful—it must be preserved!" or "That’s ugly—it must be ripped down!" or, "These HGV’s that ruin our village street must be stopped from using it as a shortcut way of saving petrol..."
I’m with you, John! How do we do it? Through schooling, through Continuing Education?
It’s absolutely not at all a matter of politics. Politics are an irrelevance. All decisions are made by Big Business, by what used to be called the Establishment. What I think you and I are talking about is something much more subtle: the education of aesthetic sensibility. What steps can be taken to encourage this in an age when education is coming more and more to be construed as education for work. I’m so glad I was educated in the 1950’s!
There is no point in creating energy to help people live in an environment that has been despoiled. One easy solution to the problem of energy provision is to make a very serious study of what lights could turned off now: three in four of any and every series of street lights, for example.
Once again, thank you for the eloquence of your presentation, John.
It has been suggested that Bridge Watch has set itself up as an ‘alternative Parish Council’. This is far from being the case: the members of Bridge Watch recognise only too well that the elected members of the existing Parish Council are the people who are supposed to be exercising their decision-making function on behalf of the residents of Sutton Bridge. Bridge Watch has identified ways in which they have failed to act on behalf of all residents. Its sole task is to watch carefully what the Parish Council does and how it does it.
Bridge Watch is also strictly non-political but when its members observe that the Parish Council is failing to ask all the right questions, as they signally failed to do of PREL on the 26th January on the subject of the proposed so-called Energy Park, they do their best to try to figure out what the right questions are. For this purpose they are happy to take well-researched information from any source.
The following is John Hayes’ detailed contribution to the Tydd St Mary Wind Turbine Planning Application which was considered by SHDC on 6th January. It can serve as a model set of guidelines for questions that any Parish Council ought to consider posing when looking at planning applications for Wind Turbine proposals and similar ‘Green’ developments.
This is a summary of John Hayes’ representation and is reprinted here with his permission.
I write to make you aware of the concerns expressed by my constituents, concerns which I share. Those concerns focus on the following issues:-
The sentiments in this letter reflect the overwhelming view of those constituents that I have been in touch with over this matter. This is evidenced by a 353 signature petition presented to me opposing this application.
The Petition is headed as follows:-
We the undersigned support our local MP John Hayes and local representative in their opposition to the siting of seven 127m tall monster wind turbines at Tydd St Mary’s Marsh.
We believe that the proposals represent a departure from the local plan and share the concerns of John Hayes MP that the proposals will have a detrimental impact on the flat Fenland Landscape, the quality of life of local residents and property prices, as well as damaging the environment and being inefficient and costly. We agree with the Lords Economic Affairs Committee that the Government’s dash for intermittent wind energy represents a risk to the continuity of supply and the long term viability of other more economically and environmentally sustainable forms of renewable energy.
According to one of our local newspapers, the official pollsters of The Times Newspaper, 'Populous', were commissioned by RES (of Kings Langley, Hertfordshire, developers of Wind Farms) to conduct a poll for them. The result of which is, it seems, that we WANT wind turbines in our wonderful landscape. The polling was done by a selective telephone survey process.
This news is accompanied by a computer enhanced photograph which shows the wind turbines to be of a lesser height than the existing pylons. This is amazing as in actual fact the proposed wind turbines will be almost twice the height of the pylons and will dwarf everything in the vicinity.
Another poll, currently running on the Spalding Today website, (as at 2.30pm Sunday, 3rd Jan) shows that 68 per cent DO NOT WANT wind turbines in this area and only 32 per cent are for.
It is suggested that the proposed wind turbines will produce enough energy to power 8000 houses i.e. 24 per cent of the total in South Holland. Is the theory that the more wind farms we have in the area the more homes will receive this electricity? Some people believe they are going to get this commodity for free. Not true. Moreover, each turbine only produces approximately 25 per cent of its potential capacity.
In fact, every householder in the UK will have to pay more on their utility bills to finance this exercise.
An additional fact is that every land owner who allows these wind turbines to be built on their land receives a minimum subsidy of £10,000 PER TURBINE, PER YEAR for 10 years, after which they receive a share of the profits! The developers also receive huge subsidies. So who are the winners here? Doubtful if it will be the National Grid or ourselves.
There are further proposals to build even more wind turbine farms in our area. If these planned developments go ahead we will be in a forest of wind turbines. Our whole landscape will be utterly destroyed. They are far more obtrusive than the pylons we already have.
Our Parish Council is on record as having said that 'the gigantic wind farm that is proposed is not in the parish of Sutton Bridge but they have been given the opportunity to comment – they have not supported the site.' Nobody knows whether they have taken any further action or made any objections. To say that the proposed wind farm is not in the parish of Sutton Bridge is a little short sighted - the effects of noise on health and well-being, not mention unsightliness or loss of house value, go beyond any boundaries. For instance, the residents of Railway Lane and the Falklands, which are in Sutton Bridge, will certainly be affected as will residents in Foul Anchor, Tydd Gote and Tydd St Mary. This is not a purely local issue: Sutton Bridge Parish Council should support neighbouring parishes. In any case, since the proposed wind turbines will not be connected to the Walpole Highway sub-station, but to the one at Long Sutton, it's obvious that there will be a loop of wind turbines between Sutton Bridge, Tydd St Mary and Long Sutton before long, unless the Parish Council takes a decisive stand.
Other counties in the East Midlands do not have anywhere near the amount of wind farms that we already have here in the Fens.
Another important factor is that wind turbines have a limited life of approximately 25 years. What will happen to them then? What happens to the blades which cannot be recycled? Other countries, i.e. Denmark and Germany, are already decommissioning their wind farms as they are not as economic as was supposed.
Already many people in Sutton Bridge are finding it increasingly difficult to sell their homes, unless they allow a huge discount on the value. What with the wind turbines and the proposed incinerator complex, the whole area will eventually become a ghost town.
Despite the widespread reporting of the experiences of Jane and Julian Davis, who had to leave their home at Deeping St Nicholas after a wind farm was built near them, a government sponsored final report has deliberately deleted the section on the effects of wind turbine noise on humans.
The experience of the Davis family makes it very clear that health risks are considerable. It has still not been disproved that these wind turbines do not have a detrimental health affect.
The plans for the seven wind turbines have been deferred by district councillors because the area earmarked has been classed unsuitable by a council study.
At a neeting on Wednesday 6th January, the development control committee deferred the plan saying they need to know more about the council's supplementary planning guidance (SPG) on wind farms.