LIVE COVERAGE: Public meeting over Navitus wind farm plans

This live event has finished

Latest

  • A public meeting is being held at the BIC over how Bournemouth council should respond to the Navitus Bay wind farm application.
  • The Planning Inspectorate has confirmed Navitus Bay has lodged a valid planning application and has published 18,000 pages of supporting documents.
  • The £3billion wind farm would consist of up to 194 turbines, up to 200 metres high.
  • Cables would hit land at Taddiford Gap, between Barton-on-Sea and New Milton, and run 22 miles to a new sub-station at Mannington near Wimborne.
  • Bournemouth Borough Council does not get to decide on the application but is being consulted.
  • The Planning Inspectorate is expected to make the final decision next year.

5:16pm

Just got the audience figures, some 630 people in attendance.

5:02pm

4:54pm

Meeting over. Council leader John Beesley tells the Daily Echo: "It is important to state that the views of residents expressed through the consultation process today carry very significant weight in the process."

Thanks for reading.

4:40pm

Tony Williams says the meeting has shown how "proud" people are of the area. Concluding, he thanks the speakers and the audience for the respect shown in the public section.

4:39pm

Cheryl Beal from Southbourne is concerned about "40 decibels of wind turbine noise", at night she says.

Now physicist Dr John Yelland has the microphone, it was he who wrote a noise impact assessment reported in the Daily Echo.

Last speaker Rachael says "most people don't want a Navitus Bay wind farm, how do you want to get your power?" Lots of answers coming from the floor, few audible.

4:36pm

4:35pm

4:35pm

David Stokes is deeply concerned about an economic threat to the town.

He says we should take our fair share of energy generation in the country.

As for complaints over the construction process, he works in construction and, he says, is used to complaints from people who are later pleased to see the work done.

A Ms Crane says the whole designated area could theoretically be filled with wind farms in future. Which concerns her.

She would like to see the council's tourism survey.

4:26pm

Tony Williams doesn't want the council to be accused of trying to generate car parking revenue by overrunning, he says, so only a few speakers to go.

4:25pm

4:25pm

Jane who works in the energy "field" says wind variability, oft mentioned, was a problem in the past but not so much now.

But we are the "Saudi Arabia of wind", she says of the UK. She is also not much convinced by the council's 'effect on tourism' figures.

4:22pm

There are a steady stream of people leaving now.

Derek Gamble says lots of points made about why not to have a wind farm in Bournemouth, not many about problems during the construction process.

He has worked on wind farms in Germany he says.

They last 15 years, theny must then be demolished with "another three years of disruption".

He would prefer to see future development of nuclear and tidal power.

4:20pm

And another speaker, whose name I missed, says she finds turbines "quite majestic".

Tony Woodcock, a Poole councillor who lives in Bournemouth, wants to congratulate the council for the meeting, some applause for that.

We haven't heard a lot about the economic impact he says. We are told that only 60 new jobs will be in this area.

We are likely to be paying 2.4 million pounds per extra job created, he says, due to the "excess energy price cost".

4:13pm

He is concerned about what he says will be tunnelling under the railway line near Christchurch, for the cables.

And the cliffs are "totally unstable".

Another speaker says most people are talking about how it will affect them, but "we are exporting devastation".

"We love our views, do we destroy other people's?"

4:10pm

4:10pm

Professor John Sharp from Highcliffe notes the cable path is "an eight lane motorway, totally denuded". He says more than 3,500 mature oak trees will be cut down for this.

He says information from the company is "misleading".

4:07pm

John Dobb strongly supports the wind farm, poor people around the world are suffering the effects of climate change, he says.

He is "willing to accept a bit of a hit on my visual amenity" so "we can do our bit".

But, he says, mitigation is important to reduce environmental damage from the project. He would like to see it in a different location.

Also, he says, the queen has nothing to do with the Crown Estate and is a very nice lady.

4:01pm

3:58pm

Monica Clarke was referring to the turbines there.

3:56pm

Lesley Jones says "we have something really unique here and we owe it to future generations to preserve that".

Monica Clarke, what happens after 25 years, how much will it cost to get rid of them?

Bournemouth encourages people to holiday in the UK rather than take planes and thus "does its bit", says another resident.

3:55pm

3:52pm

"I can leave here with a clear conscience," she adds. And leaves.

Another speaker is concerned that there should be a report into potential disasters such as oil spills, possibly resulting from the development.

Tony Yates of Hengistbury Head Residents' Association, he says simply that residents "overwhelmingly" oppose the project.

And another speaker believes the council should write to the queen as she is angry with the Crown Estate's role in the whole thing.

3:48pm

3:47pm

Henry Shackter, sorry about any misspellings.

"Do not allow another blot on the landscape," he says referring to the IMAX building.

"Climate change will have a far greater effect on the landscape than this wind farm," says Angela Pooley from East Dorset Friends of the Earth.

Some jeers to that, Mr Williams has asked the audience to respect speakers.

3:45pm

3:44pm

Chris Colledge of West Cliff Residents' Association echoes Cllr Beesley's view that "we are custodians of Bournemouth". He says the majority of West a Cliff residents feel Navitus is too big and too close.

As a member of the angling community, he says "one cannot underestimate the effect this will have on the marine life we are privileged enough to have in our area".

"It seems to me the Crown Estate are trying to contract out the seas to make revenue."

3:41pm

3:40pm

3:40pm

And Mr Ellwood's brief speech brings us to the public questions section.

Sadly not many people giving their names before speaking as invited by chairman Tony Williams.

3:40pm

3:37pm

"We are an exceptional resort," like Barcelona he says, and people will not visit with a backdrop of wind farms.

He also is "100 per cent" against the proposal.

3:36pm

Mr Burns says in response to accusations of NIMBYism - "My back yard is a World Heritage Site", apparently quoting a commentator on the Daily Echo site.

On comes Bournemouth East MP Tobias Ellwood.

3:34pm

3:34pm

3:33pm

He is "absolutely 100 per cent opposed" to the project.

He is "angry" about how the company has treated the community.

It is "in the wrong place", "very close and very visible".

He says we need to pass on our area unspoiled to future generations, and safeguard local jobs.

3:31pm

Only two more speakers, first is Bournemouth West MP Conor Burns.

"One of the biggest issues to confront our town in a generation," he opens.

3:30pm

The council needs to do more to investigate.

He says the council are custodians of "Britain's most beautiful resort".

But the decision will be made by the government, based on the views of the Planning Inspectorate.

Council will reflect views of residents, based on facts.

But, he says, "we are alarmed by this project".

3:27pm

Council needs to concentrate on scale, closeness, height, noise, visual amenity, he says, as the statutory consultee.

The decision will be based on facts and will not be pre-determined.

Also, the council's research shows the impact on tourism could be considerable, he adds.

3:25pm

Council leader John Beesley up next, a round of applause to start.

He says the process of working with Navitus has been "frustrating", noting broken promises and a struggle to get information or create accurate visualisations of the project.

3:22pm

3:21pm

"We want to see this scheme quickly confined to the dustbin of history," he says.

More applause. The audience is becoming rather more vocal but is still well mannered.

3:20pm

3:18pm

Mr Pointer repeats the surveyed 14 per cent reduction in visitors.

But he now moves on to "shipping dangers" and the threat to birds.

Turbines can have tip speed of 200mph "what chance does a flock of birds have" he says.

3:18pm

3:16pm

Residents' complaints, he lists -

Wind energy is expensive.

Government recommends a 12 mile limit for offshore projects.

UNESCO haven't made a decision on the heritage status of the Jurassic Coast.

Noise. This site is about twice the power of other sites.

3:13pm

3:13pm

Miles of glorious Blue Flag beaches, fantastic "unique" view, Bournemouth is special he says.

People think you're "nuts" when you tell them a wind farm is going in the bay, he says.

3:10pm

Next Roy Pointer of the Poole and Christchurch Bay's Association.

Navitus is "too big, too close, and in the wrong location" he says, netting a round of applause.

3:08pm

3:08pm

There is no evidence of turbines affecting tourism, she says.

Claims about noise are false. No complaints about the airport, she says.

She says she has asked the council to quantify mankind's chances of surviving the century.

"Lets say yes to Navitus, yes to a clean future for our children," she concludes to mixed cheers and boos.

3:03pm

She asks what the council is doing to contribute.

She says the area could benefit from the development of a green economy.

Also, wind power "does work" she says.

Most of the objection based on the view. Images seen by the public in the Daily Echo and elsewhere are misleading, she says, as they are close-ups.

3:03pm

3:01pm

3:01pm

2:59pm

Urgent action is needed to deal with climate change she says.

She lists an array of sources, including the IPCC, describing the dangers posed by future climate change.

2:57pm

Described as possibly the area's most active green campaigner, Susan Chapman, from Southbourne.

She is here for future generations, she says, who "aren't very well represented here today".

2:55pm

"We have choices about where we build onshore wind farms.

"Navitus Bay is just a bad plan and in the wrong place."

Strong applause for Dr Langley as he concludes.

2:54pm

He says part of the wealth of the region is in its landscape.

On the national picture, he says an area the size of Wales is designated for wind energy, including sites further from the coast in the North Sea.

2:52pm

You should be able to see the wind farm when you can see the Isle of Wight, he says.

And they will have flashing navigation lights.

2:51pm

Dr Langley says the noise and debris from pile driving at sea will have an adverse impact on marine organisms.

He says at least five million square metres of sea bed would be affected.

"If this level of destruction were occurring on land where we could see it I'm sure there would be much more of an outcry."

2:47pm

The turbines are "very large structures which can be seen at long range".

He now mentions onshore facilities, including a 22mile high voltage cable, a major civil engineering project equivalent to an eight lane motorway, he says.

2:47pm

2:46pm

2:44pm

At the centre of the bay, mostly lined by cliffs, the project would be visible from all around, he says.

Affecting England's only World Heritage Site and other areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty around the bay.

2:44pm


 

2:42pm

Next Dr Andrew Langley of campaign group Challenge Navitus, who says the location is a compromise.

He shows a map of the site, just over 14 miles from Bournemouth, "really quite close", taking up around a third of the licensed area.

2:41pm

2:40pm

At the Princess Amalia site in the Netherlands, same developer, the site is 25 miles offshore and has no visual impact on the beach.

In summary, significant visitor economy damage, harm suggested to a global asset, missed opportunity for a project better suited to the area.

2:38pm

Mr Smith is comparing Bournemouth with other areas around the country where wind farms exist.

He says wind farms and tourism are not mutually exclusive. But in the Lake District they have been kept away from "special areas".

2:35pm

He says visitor numbers will be down 32 per cent after five years, down 14 per cent in the long term according to a survey, although other areas haven't experienced that decline, he says.

140 jobs promised inthe area, but only in one host port.

7 million visitors to seafront per year, views described as "breath-taking" on Tripadvisor.

2:30pm

He says images of the project on the Navitus website are misleading.

The hall is still slowly filling up. Several hundred people here but it is not quite full.

2:28pm

Noise levels will be within accceptable parameters.

He says many other offshore wind farms are within sight of tourist resorts and have not damaged tourism there.

This concludes his remarks.

Council director of tourism Mark Smith is next.

2:26pm

He says the company is working with the government and UNESCO with regard to concerns that the project might damage the heritage status of the Jurassic Coast.

The government, he says, has judged that there would not be a significant impact.

2:24pm

He is now asking people to base their views on facts.

He says it is not a requirement that offshore wind farms are 12 nautical miles from the shore.

He says Navitus has consulted a wide array of groups about the danger the turbines might present to birds. The impact on populations would be "not significant".

2:21pm

He wants to ensure local businesses working in renewables, or industries which can be applied, are involved to "bring value to the area".

2:20pm

In submitting the application the firm sets maximum parameters for turbine height and the size of the wind farm, allowing some lee-way.

1.3 million tonnes of carbon offset by the project, he says.

2:17pm

He opens his remarks by discussing wind power in general terms.

The UK is a world leader in wind energy technology, he says, and the government see the sector as a job creator.

2:15pm

Welcome to our live coverage of today's wind farm meeting.

Navitus Bay project director Mike Unsworth is the first speaker.

2:03pm

Comments (13)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

2:13pm Sat 10 May 14

Townee says...

NIMBY's out in force, stirred up by a minority as usual.
I hope this government do the right thing and build them offshore, better than onshore.
NIMBY's out in force, stirred up by a minority as usual. I hope this government do the right thing and build them offshore, better than onshore. Townee
  • Score: -3

2:15pm Sat 10 May 14

Townee says...

Nearly enough hot air to generate megawatts of power.
Nearly enough hot air to generate megawatts of power. Townee
  • Score: -5

2:29pm Sat 10 May 14

muscliffman says...

Townee wrote:
NIMBY's out in force, stirred up by a minority as usual.
I hope this government do the right thing and build them offshore, better than onshore.
NIMBY's are NOT the real threat to these wind farm proposals, it's people engaging their brains and using a bit of common sense who will probably put an end to them.
[quote][p][bold]Townee[/bold] wrote: NIMBY's out in force, stirred up by a minority as usual. I hope this government do the right thing and build them offshore, better than onshore.[/p][/quote]NIMBY's are NOT the real threat to these wind farm proposals, it's people engaging their brains and using a bit of common sense who will probably put an end to them. muscliffman
  • Score: 3

3:31pm Sat 10 May 14

roysses says...

There are four Anti's alowed to speak, including an MP. The MP in favour was not invited by the "independed" chairman. One of those four is an Ofiicer of the Council paid for by me.

Only two speakers were allowed to talk in favour of the proposal, Navitas and a resident from Southbourne. Where were the other two to make equal time for both the Pro and Aniti views?

Have the Bournemouth Chief Executive and Tourism Director both decided to use our money to decide the decision?
There are four Anti's alowed to speak, including an MP. The MP in favour was not invited by the "independed" chairman. One of those four is an Ofiicer of the Council paid for by me. Only two speakers were allowed to talk in favour of the proposal, Navitas and a resident from Southbourne. Where were the other two to make equal time for both the Pro and Aniti views? Have the Bournemouth Chief Executive and Tourism Director both decided to use our money to decide the decision? roysses
  • Score: 0

3:58pm Sat 10 May 14

Townee says...

As usual the meeting is anti and so is the Echo, most comments are anti and as was said only a few people got to speak for the wind farm while many were allowed to speak against it.
This shows what Beasley and his clan want as usual nothing good for Bournemouth unless they get their cut.
This will be built and the government will have the final say not all the NIMBY's who would have us all back in the dark ages. We need power and not from Europe and Russia, we need our own power generation.
As usual the meeting is anti and so is the Echo, most comments are anti and as was said only a few people got to speak for the wind farm while many were allowed to speak against it. This shows what Beasley and his clan want as usual nothing good for Bournemouth unless they get their cut. This will be built and the government will have the final say not all the NIMBY's who would have us all back in the dark ages. We need power and not from Europe and Russia, we need our own power generation. Townee
  • Score: -2

5:28pm Sat 10 May 14

carrrob says...

Townee wrote:
As usual the meeting is anti and so is the Echo, most comments are anti and as was said only a few people got to speak for the wind farm while many were allowed to speak against it.
This shows what Beasley and his clan want as usual nothing good for Bournemouth unless they get their cut.
This will be built and the government will have the final say not all the NIMBY's who would have us all back in the dark ages. We need power and not from Europe and Russia, we need our own power generation.
Get real you have China and The rest of the world outside of europe polluting on a massive scale what this country doed will make no difference !
Be assured this is all about money and not save the planet.
[quote][p][bold]Townee[/bold] wrote: As usual the meeting is anti and so is the Echo, most comments are anti and as was said only a few people got to speak for the wind farm while many were allowed to speak against it. This shows what Beasley and his clan want as usual nothing good for Bournemouth unless they get their cut. This will be built and the government will have the final say not all the NIMBY's who would have us all back in the dark ages. We need power and not from Europe and Russia, we need our own power generation.[/p][/quote]Get real you have China and The rest of the world outside of europe polluting on a massive scale what this country doed will make no difference ! Be assured this is all about money and not save the planet. carrrob
  • Score: 1

5:38pm Sat 10 May 14

Sir Retry69 says...

At last the whole of the silent majority have shown up,all 600+ slight improvement on the usual dirty dozen lol :)
At last the whole of the silent majority have shown up,all 600+ slight improvement on the usual dirty dozen lol :) Sir Retry69
  • Score: -5

5:42pm Sat 10 May 14

ShuttleX says...

roysses wrote:
There are four Anti's alowed to speak, including an MP. The MP in favour was not invited by the "independed" chairman. One of those four is an Ofiicer of the Council paid for by me.

Only two speakers were allowed to talk in favour of the proposal, Navitas and a resident from Southbourne. Where were the other two to make equal time for both the Pro and Aniti views?

Have the Bournemouth Chief Executive and Tourism Director both decided to use our money to decide the decision?
The Council can't decide roysses. All they can do is try and please everybody, so as not to lose votes by taking sides.I find it funny really. For years the Council have been "consulting" the public, then doing what they like anyway. Now the shoe is on the other foot. They are being "consulted" but no notice will be taken of what they want. Priceless. Meetings like this are a waste of time. Those who are anti windfarm won't change their minds, nor will the ones in favour. Just go ahead and build the thing.
[quote][p][bold]roysses[/bold] wrote: There are four Anti's alowed to speak, including an MP. The MP in favour was not invited by the "independed" chairman. One of those four is an Ofiicer of the Council paid for by me. Only two speakers were allowed to talk in favour of the proposal, Navitas and a resident from Southbourne. Where were the other two to make equal time for both the Pro and Aniti views? Have the Bournemouth Chief Executive and Tourism Director both decided to use our money to decide the decision?[/p][/quote]The Council can't decide roysses. All they can do is try and please everybody, so as not to lose votes by taking sides.I find it funny really. For years the Council have been "consulting" the public, then doing what they like anyway. Now the shoe is on the other foot. They are being "consulted" but no notice will be taken of what they want. Priceless. Meetings like this are a waste of time. Those who are anti windfarm won't change their minds, nor will the ones in favour. Just go ahead and build the thing. ShuttleX
  • Score: -7

5:43pm Sat 10 May 14

Sir Retry69 says...

Don't see the usual handful of commenters on here ,obviously down there to make up the numbers
Don't see the usual handful of commenters on here ,obviously down there to make up the numbers Sir Retry69
  • Score: -3

6:16pm Sat 10 May 14

muscliffman says...

Townee wrote:
As usual the meeting is anti and so is the Echo, most comments are anti and as was said only a few people got to speak for the wind farm while many were allowed to speak against it.
This shows what Beasley and his clan want as usual nothing good for Bournemouth unless they get their cut.
This will be built and the government will have the final say not all the NIMBY's who would have us all back in the dark ages. We need power and not from Europe and Russia, we need our own power generation.
Correct "We need power and not from Europe and Russia, we need our own power generation."

But is has to be efficient, reliable 24/7 and inexpensive - so clean coal, shale gas and nuclear are the ONLY realistic options available to us at present - and we already have our own absolutely vast UK stocks of the first two fuels.
[quote][p][bold]Townee[/bold] wrote: As usual the meeting is anti and so is the Echo, most comments are anti and as was said only a few people got to speak for the wind farm while many were allowed to speak against it. This shows what Beasley and his clan want as usual nothing good for Bournemouth unless they get their cut. This will be built and the government will have the final say not all the NIMBY's who would have us all back in the dark ages. We need power and not from Europe and Russia, we need our own power generation.[/p][/quote]Correct "We need power and not from Europe and Russia, we need our own power generation." But is has to be efficient, reliable 24/7 and inexpensive - so clean coal, shale gas and nuclear are the ONLY realistic options available to us at present - and we already have our own absolutely vast UK stocks of the first two fuels. muscliffman
  • Score: 3

6:41pm Sat 10 May 14

Flusters says...

Not in my back yard... in my opinion that's what the French and Dutch, who own Navitus say. Why don't they build wind farms on their most beautiful parts of coastline instead of ours? St Tropez... Cap d'azure... can you imagine it? Why don't they then send us their energy via a pipeline across the Kent coastline and accept fracking in their country side (which doesn't seem on the face of it such a bad thing to me) instead of taking power from ours?

There are SO many anti Navitus valid points... preservation of wildlife, and migrating birds, ruining iconic boating areas and coastline, tourism and the beauty of this iconic area, yet most of the comments here are making personal insults and not maintaining a valid argument.

Young or old, rich or poor, if you are a local resident and especially if your ancestors have been born here for generations you are entitled to an opinion on this subject.

After he and his brother gave their lives defending the mouth of Poole harbour, Harry Paye must be turning in his grave as we just give this global heritage, historical, magnificent nautical site away.
Not in my back yard... in my opinion that's what the French and Dutch, who own Navitus say. Why don't they build wind farms on their most beautiful parts of coastline instead of ours? St Tropez... Cap d'azure... can you imagine it? Why don't they then send us their energy via a pipeline across the Kent coastline and accept fracking in their country side (which doesn't seem on the face of it such a bad thing to me) instead of taking power from ours? There are SO many anti Navitus valid points... preservation of wildlife, and migrating birds, ruining iconic boating areas and coastline, tourism and the beauty of this iconic area, yet most of the comments here are making personal insults and not maintaining a valid argument. Young or old, rich or poor, if you are a local resident and especially if your ancestors have been born here for generations you are entitled to an opinion on this subject. After he and his brother gave their lives defending the mouth of Poole harbour, Harry Paye must be turning in his grave as we just give this global heritage, historical, magnificent nautical site away. Flusters
  • Score: 0

7:37pm Sat 10 May 14

ShuttleX says...

muscliffman said ..."But is has to be efficient, reliable 24/7 and inexpensive - so clean coal, shale gas and nuclear are the ONLY realistic options available to us at present - and we already have our own absolutely vast UK stocks of the first two fuels."

As long as none of them are produced in your back yard? No problem if somebody else has to put up with the coal mines, shale extraction sites, or a nice big nuclear power station? All the arguments I have heard against this windfarm all seem to have one thing in common....Not In My Back Yard.
muscliffman said ..."But is has to be efficient, reliable 24/7 and inexpensive - so clean coal, shale gas and nuclear are the ONLY realistic options available to us at present - and we already have our own absolutely vast UK stocks of the first two fuels." As long as none of them are produced in your back yard? No problem if somebody else has to put up with the coal mines, shale extraction sites, or a nice big nuclear power station? All the arguments I have heard against this windfarm all seem to have one thing in common....Not In My Back Yard. ShuttleX
  • Score: 0

8:13pm Sat 10 May 14

rogerlu says...

Had i been able to attend I would have attempted to make the following points in favour of the proposal.
1) The East Coast tourism industry has not been damaged by wind farms and oil installation off the Lincolnshire and Norfolk coasts. Why should Bournemouth be any different?
2) A postcode map recently published shows that every address in Bournemouth is in danger of "fracking". Fracking seems to be the alternative energy source to Windfarms. Having lived over 40 years in a colliery area I have seen the ravages of subsidence on homes businesses and roads; fracking has similar undermining effects. Is this really what residents want.
If residents are so determined to prevent steps being taken to contain climate change that they risk their lives through drowning as the planet heats that is their affair. Just don't expose others to the effects of their Nimbyist attitudes.
Had i been able to attend I would have attempted to make the following points in favour of the proposal. 1) The East Coast tourism industry has not been damaged by wind farms and oil installation off the Lincolnshire and Norfolk coasts. Why should Bournemouth be any different? 2) A postcode map recently published shows that every address in Bournemouth is in danger of "fracking". Fracking seems to be the alternative energy source to Windfarms. Having lived over 40 years in a colliery area I have seen the ravages of subsidence on homes businesses and roads; fracking has similar undermining effects. Is this really what residents want. If residents are so determined to prevent steps being taken to contain climate change that they risk their lives through drowning as the planet heats that is their affair. Just don't expose others to the effects of their Nimbyist attitudes. rogerlu
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree