Issue - meetings

For the retention of the BRX4 well, the regularisation of the BRX4Z side-track, and the appraisal of BRX4Z using production plant and equipment within the existing site, for a temporary period of three years (part retrospective).

Officers:

Caroline Smith, Planning Development Manager

Stephen Jenkins, Deputy Planning Development Manager

David Maxwell, Senior Planning Officer

Saira Tamboo, Planning Lawyer

Speakers:

Mr McDonald, proxy for Mr Taylor MEP, a local resident, made representation in objection to the application. He made the following points:

-        That there had been a series of minor earthquakes in the area and that more research was needed to find out the causes of this.

-        That the application should be deferred until there was an opportunity to monitor and review the potential damage.

-        That part of the application was retrospective.

-        That the application had negative effects on the environment.

-        That more information was needed on the economic benefits of the application.

-        That the increased Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGV) would cause issues on the narrow county lanes.

-        That it was unclear why the application required a temporary period of three years. 

Ms Zalucka, a local resident, made representation in objection to the application.  She made the following points:

-        That the County Planning Authority should work in cooperation with other regulators to consider issues related to the application.

-        That the oil works make the area less desirable to live in.

-        That Angus Energy previously started works on the side-track without the County Planning Authority’s permission and should be punished for breaking the rules.

-        That the Brockham Wellsite operated under an outdated environmental permit and so the application should be deferred until a new permit is in place. Alternatively, conditions should be put in place to prevent appraisal works until a new permit is in place and to limit the appraisal phase to no more than six months.

Ms Smith, a local resident, made representations in objection to the application. She made the following points:

-        That the application was vague and lacked detail.

-        That Angus Energy drilled the side track without permission which was an intentional breach of planning.

-        Provided examples of when Angus Energy had breached planning conditions and had worked outside the agreed work-hours.

-        That more information was needed on Angus Energy’s intentions as one could argue that this was a commercially non-productive well.

-        That the application was not clear on how large quantities of fresh water would be transported to the site.

-        That the various proposals in the application were vague and needed more detail.

-        Asked that the application be rejected.

Mr Tucker, proxy for Mrs Elcoate, a local resident, made representation in objection to the application. He made the following points:

-        Referred to the work of a professor working at the University of Edinburgh who had suggested that the recent earthquake activity was a result of the hydrocarbon exploration.

-        That all activity should be paused whilst a full scientific analysis was undertaken.

-        That there was evidence that earthquakes could damage the integrity of wells.

-        Stated various concerns relating to the relationship between the wellsite works and seismic activity in the area.

-        Asked  ...  view the full minutes text for item 26