WOOD BURNING POWER STATION DOCUMENT INSPECTION.

Further to our last posting, we attended the document inspection at Lympne Village hall for the pre-validation of the proposed wood burning power station application. As expected, there were bundles of documents and drawings openly displayed in the hope of persuading us that this project is good for local people, good for the environment, good for the nation and built/ operated by a professional company.

We believe that this company is disingenuous in it's approach to our residents and local neighbouring communities and that the only motivation for this company is profit.

They state that their exhibition held in January was well advertised and showed a copy of a tiny advert placed in the 'Herald' local paper with the 'on sale' date of 29th January. The exhibition was held two days later, 31st January. This was the ONLY form of advertising shown as evidence in the documentation bundle. Moreover, in other documentation. they stated that although it was snowing, a good turnout was realised. Well I know that it didn't snow on the 31st January and I also know that it wasn't a good turnout.  

This, as previously stated, is an exercise in moving in under the radar to secure approval of a profit making venture to the detriment of our communities. Hopefully our newly elected representatives will be making the right noises at Shepway District Council to initially re-run the January exhibition, only after local Parish Councils have had good time to publicise the event in the monthly Parish magazines together with posters at all Parish notice boards and a minimum half page advert in ALL local newspapers. Only then will we see a real turnout of Residents.

If you are in any doubt as to the size of the Power station, take a trip to Dungeness Power station and check out the height, The proposed Otterpool Power station is actually higher. 

There are many more issues that have been briefly covered in previous postings and you can be sure that there is a long way to run in this application if, and when it becomes validated. In the interim we would encourage you all to write to Jenny Hollingsbee, Damian Collins MP. David Monk, SDC Leader, asking that the Iceni Energy 2 exhibition be re-run with a reasonable 'lead-in' advertising time. Please email us if you require further details.

In the meantime the Application documentation may be viewed in the Committee room of Sellindge Village Hall during 'Pop-in' hours: Monday and Wednesday 8.30am-12pm. Tuesday 8.30am - 3.00pm. up until 17th June, although this period may be extended.

The documents may also be viewed at the Parish Council office on Friday afternoons between 3 and 5pm. Contact details (Parish Council) should you wish to discuss the validation further: 07788 414313. nnwfursdon@aol.com

S&DRA's position is clear. We believe this venture is completely unsustainable and detrimental to our environment and communities. We oppose this application at every level.

Les Barratt. Co-Chairman. S&DRA.

PROPOSED POWER STATION FOR SELLINDGE / LYMPNE.

Dear Residents,

It appears that the company, Iceni Energy 2, that is proposing to build and operate a wood burning power station in Otterpool Lane is about to submit a planning application to Shepway District Council (SDC).

Although the application has yet to be validated by SDC, Lympne Parish Council has received the relevant documentation which will be on view at Lympne Village Hall on the following dates:

Saturday, 6th June. 10am - 12pm.  Thursday 11th June. 3pm - 5pm. Tuesday, 16th June. 6pm --8pm.

If these dates are not convenient, appointments may be made by contacting the  Lympne Parish clerk on 01303-265651.

You will recall that this company held an exhibition earlier in the year but conveniently forgot to inform Parish Councils and local residents of their intentions. 

We reserve comment at this stage but will be commenting further after 6th June.

Les Barratt

Co-Chairman. S&DRA,

WOOD BURNING POWER STATION PROPOSED FOR OTTERPOOL LANE.

Just when we thought it couldn't get any worse for the residents of Sellindge and Lympne, along comes Iceni Energy2 Ltd.

Who are they?. A small family run business based in Norfolk with finger in various green pies with a list of directorships between them. But to be honest, who cares.

The fact of the matter is that we now have a company jumping on the bandwagon of 'Biomass' energy to secure generous subsidies from central Government (our money) to operate a wood burning power station, burning over 820 tonnes of wood each day. According to the company Architect, building height will be a minimum of 30 metres (100 feet) with a chimney stack at 70 metres..Moreover, HGV traffic will increase adding to congestion and pollution. 

Where is the wood coming from?, One director said 'Norway', one said 'Kent and when that runs out, probably Norway'. Will we see Lyminge forest cut down at an unsustainable rate? Either way, it doesn't take a genius to work out how unsustainable it would be to transport this huge amount of feed stock alongside deforestation to the detriment of our wildlife and eco systems. 

Iceni Energy held an exhibition at Lympne Village Hall last Saturday, 31st January, With no notification to neighbouring Parish Councils or any other form of advertising. It seems that the company was hoping for little resistance from local people, simply to report to Shepway Distict Council that no opposition was initially encountered, leaving a clear route to a formal planning application. 

Our Association heard about the exhibition the night before and contacted our members to attend.. Iceni Energy can now be in no doubt that they are not and never will be welcomed here.

What can we as individuals do? Write to your local MP - Damian Collins, David Monk, Leader at Shepway DC, and Jenny Hollingsbee - your local Councillor.  

Our Association will be meeting within the coming days to plan our strategy going forward. Please feel free to contact us at any time for information.

Les Barratt. Co Chairman S&DRA.

OTTERPOOL: LATEST ENVIRONMENT AGENCY POSITION TO CONDITION 12, DRAINAGE.

In a letter dated 21st May 2014 from Beth Axtell at the Environment Agency to Angela Watts at KCC relating to condition 12, Drainage, the Agency have delivered the message that they are still not in a position to recommend the discharge of condition 12. 

The reasons given are totally in line with our view that the proposed scheme put forward by Countrystyle is unsustainable and void of 'best practice' in terms of design. 

You will recall that this application lapsed on the 27th March, but KCC have chosen to keep it 'live'. We still believe that KCC are in breach of planning law as previously stated. 

We are of the firm opinion that KCC should tell Countrystyle that 'enough is enough'. All the way through this application Countrystyle have prevaricated and dodged real environmental issues that are a concern to us all. This latest submission from the Environment Agency must surely indicate to KCC that it's time to 'call it a day' for Messrs Countrystyle. 

Our Association will be writing to KCC planning officers, further requesting that Countrystyle be made to reapply for planning permission. This is not only our view but also the views of the Environment Agency and the Council for the Protection of Rural England (CPRE).

Les Barratt, Co-Chairman S&DRA

S&DRA POSITION STATEMENT - OTTERPOOL QUARRY.

Recent publicity surrounding Otterpool Quarry has prompted some parishioners to question our actions relating to conditions attached to the Countrystyle approval granted over 3 years ago by Kent County Council. The very same sentiment was echoed by just one of the Planning applications Committee (Councillor Christopher Smith) on 12th March at County Hall, stating that permission had been granted, so why bother about the detail in conditions. Fortunately, the majority of the Planning Applications Committee Members do not take that simplistic, uncaring attitude but have chosen to adopt a more holistic and clear thinking approach that will ensure conditions are strictly met. At this point I will also mention that our Association met with Richard King, Chairman, Mike Clifton and Head of Planning, Sharon Thompson who clearly stated that these conditions are important and robust enough to withstand legal or other challenges. At the time we felt assured that this would be the case. Sadly, our confidence in the KCC planning department has nose dived firmly south. 

The consent period has lapsed. The pre-commencement entrance works, which is now being described as enabling works by Angela Watts, is nowhere near finished, The Landscaping,  Drainage and Contamination conditions have yet to be discharged and yet the application is being kept live by the Planning Officers. 

We firmly believe, that given the above set of circumstances, KCC are in breach of  Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

Our clear message to our communities is this: We didn't approve of the application being given consent over 3 years ago but there is little that we can do to reverse that decision. Our concern at the present time is that the outstanding conditions are rigorously scrutinised and considered, and where need be, via the Environment Agency. Moreover, for Kent County Council to act within the spirit of those conditions and in accordance with Planning Law.

Finally we would like to take this opportunity to thank all Parishioners, from all Parishes, for their continuing support along with our local media streams.

Les Barratt. Co-Chairman. S&DRA.

KCC Letter to S&DRA 28-Mar-2014

As per the previous posting, the letter from Angela Watts to our Association.

Please click on the link bellow to open.

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/document-preview.aspx?doc_id=168305352&key=undefined&pass=undefined

KCC PLANNING OFFICERS LET DOWN OUR COMMUNTIES AGAIN.

Q: When does an expiry date become an unexpired date.

A: When KCC are involved.

On the 27th March 2014 the planning consent for Countrystyle to build a waster and Digester site at Otterpool Quarry lapsed. Or did it. According to Angela Watts, Senior planning officer at KCC, it's not necessary for the entrance construction (condition 5) to be completed before the expiry date provided that the applicant submits details of the said works prior to the expiry date.

S&DRA's view is that it clearly states in condition 5 that the entrance should be COMPLETED before consideration is given to the main construction works. At present, the entrance has not been completed, the 3 year consent period has lapsed, therefore the applicant needs to reapply for planning permission. Moreover, conditions 12, and 14-17, Drainage and Contamination are no further being discharged than what they were three years ago. 

KCC state that Countrystyle provided written confirmation of their intention to commence enabling works at the site in accordance with the approved access details on March 12th. If that was the case, why wasn't it mentioned during the meeting when committee members would have had the chance to respond. So did Countrystyle suddenly realise after the committee meeting that the entrance should be built before the 27th? What time was the written confirmation received? Why did Countrystyle suddenly start to build the entrance so soon after the meeting? What discussions or negotiations took place between KCC Planning Officers and Countrystyle after 12th March?

The KCC letter dated 28th March 2014 to S&DRA will be posted on our website very shortly.

Les Barratt, Co-Chairman S&DRA.

WORKS BEING CARRIED OUT AT OTTERPOOL 14TH AND 15TH MARCH.

After countless telephone calls from concerned residents explaining that works around the entrance are now being carried out with mature trees being cut down in the Otterpool site, we can confirm that under the terms of conditions attached to Countysyle's consent, condition 5 clearly states that the entrance should be COMPLETED before any development commences on site. Whether it can be COMPLETED before 27th March 2014, being the end of the 3 year consent period, is of no concern to us. It is very clearly set out in the conditions that if they are not ALL discharged before the consent period expires, the application will lapse and the applicant will have to re-apply for planning permission. Please see the previous two posting on our website detailing the position with conditions 12 and 14-17.

Les Barratt. Co-Chairman, S&DRA.

ENVIRONMENT AGENCY COMMENTS ON SITE CONTAMINATION (conditions 14-17).

In an email to Angela Watts at KCC dated 14th March 2014 the Environment Agency (EA) made the following comments; 'We are not currently in a position to recommend the discharge conditions 14-17 of planning permission SH/08/124 as we still do not feel confident that all issues at this site have been investigated as far as possible.

To summarise, S&DRA's members expertise extend to Civil engineering, Planning, Drainage and Architecture, but are left wanting in environmental sciences. We therefore commissioned a highly respected, independent Environmental scientist to issue a report on site contamination matters. Duly sent to EA for immediate consideration and mentioned in the aforementioned email we are most grateful for the unbiased and professional assessment review of existing site conditions. It should also be noted that information was gleaned from site workers operating on site in the 1980's. We will be submitting further information to EA to support further investigations. In particular, the unofficial 18 metre (sixty feet) deep pit that was dug to dump a whole raft of 'on site' and 'off site' materials including petrol, diesel, tarmac, bitumen amongst other hazardous materials including vehicles.

Les Barratt. Co-Chairman, S&DRA. 

ENVIRONMENT AGENCY COMMENTS ON SURFACE WATER DRAINAGE (condition 12)

In a recent email to Angela Watts at KCC dated 12th March 2014, the following comments were made by the Environment Agency (EA): 'We are not currently in a position to recommend the discharge of condition 12 of planning permission SH/08/124'.

To summarise, in recent correspondence to the applicant, information was being sought between the correlation between attenuation lagoons and site groundwater levels. It was noted by EA that the attenuation lagoons could be below groundwater levels and that additional information was required. The S&DRA confirm that this would be the case and in actual fact, given the noted conservative groundwater levels, the lagoons, including hydrobrake's/chambers would be totally under water. It should also be noted that SLR's (Countystyle'e experts/agents) own borehole readings are within 150mm (6 inches) of our own.

On the matter of sustainable drainage, Countrystyle's scheme would be to pump the water from site, under the A20 into a ditch and then into an existing pipe across Farmer Price's field. The EA pointed out that this is not a sustainable drainage system and therefore would not be considered. 

The S&DRA agree with EA's comments and look to be providing further factual information on historic borehole readings.

Les Barratt. Co-Chairman, S&DRA.