Staff preparing to unload from vehicle at the Lidsey Oil Site, West Sussex, 28 July 2017. Photo: Weald Oil Watch
West Sussex County Council confirmed today that there had been another breach of planning permission at the Angus Energy oil site at Lidsey, near Bognor Regis.
The news coincided with an announcement from the company that it had approval to drill a horizontal well at Lidsey but production could be delayed because the rig was still at another site.
Planning breach
A delivery lorry used an unauthorised route to the Lidsey oil field site just days after a council warning, it was confirmed this afternoon.
West Sussex County Council said it regarded the use of the unauthorised route as another breach of a condition of the site’s planning permission. This specifically states that the route must not be used for highway safety reasons. It joins a 50mph road, the A29, between two blind bends.
DrillOrDrop reported last month that the county council had warned Angus Energy that deliveries must use the authorised route after a similar breach of the planning condition. This followed an official complaint, accompanied by video evidence, that a vehicle had used the unauthorised route on 24 July 2017.
Unauthorised exit to Lidsey site recorded on 24 July 2017. Photo: Weald Oil Watch
The council said it also regarded use of the unauthorised route as a breach of a Section 106 legal agreement, which required deliveries to take a route through a small industrial estate at Lidsey Farm.
A spokesperson for the council said the company was warned about the condition and legal agreement on 26 July 2017.
But two days later, on 28 July 2017, residents filmed another vehicle making the same unauthorised journey.
Vehicle leaving the Lidsey site, 28 July 2017. Photo: Still from video by Weald Oil Watch
The council spokesperson confirmed that another formal complaint had been received and that the second delivery was also regarded as a breach of the planning condition and the Section 106 agreement.
According to the formal complaint and video evidence, the delivery driver began to unload the cargo but when the site manager saw two eye witnesses he told the driver to re-load the lorry and leave.
The eye witnesses said the driver told them it was the right load delivered to the correct site.
The council spokesperson said:
“We made contact with the operator [Angus Energy] on 26 July and highlighted the requirements of the condition and the legal agreement, and the highway safety reasons for these requirements.
“They have confirmed that with immediate effect, only the authorised access to the site will be used.
“They subsequently made contact to advise that a lorry had accessed the site using the wrong access, but had been reprimanded and redirected.”
This is at least the third breach of the planning condition for deliveries at the Lidsey site. In October 2014, the council told Angus:
“The County Planning Authority is aware that there may have been obstructions in the past along the approved vehicular route to the A29 which could have prevented access. Please be aware that all vehicular access and egress to the site must be obtained via the approved route.” (Link to document)
Angus is also involved in a dispute about planning breaches at Brockham, near Dorking, the other site where it is an operator. Surrey County Council has said the company did not have permission to drill a side track well in January this year. But the company has consistently denied this.
DrillOrDrop asked Angus Energy to comment on the planning breach recorded on 24 July but it did not respond. We also invited it to comment on the most recent one and this post will be updated with any response.
Drilling approval
Angus issued a statement to investors this afternoon confirming it had approval from the Oil and Gas Authority for a horizontal production well, to be called Lidsey-X2.
The company previously received planning permission for Lidsey from the county council in April and was granted an environmental permit by the Environment Agency in May.
But drilling is not expected imminently because the rig to be used at Lidsey – the BDF Rig 28 – is thought to be still at Broadford Bridge in West Sussex. (The waste management plan for Broadford Bridge lists the BDF Rig 28 among the equipment planned for the site.)
Drilling rig. Photo: DrillOrDrop
The new well will target the Great Oolite reservoir but will also take samples from the Kimmeridge layers, which are being explored at Broadford Bridge, and at Horse Hill in Surrey.
The Angus statement said:
“The Company notes its timeline for Lidsey-X2 to re-commence production from Lidsey may now be delayed by a few weeks due to the extension of BDF Rig 28’s current work obligations for an unrelated third party. These modified operations have postponed the equipment mobilisation date to the Lidsey oil field.”
Angus added that the delay would not have any material impact.
It said:
“The Company expects an operating window of approximately six weeks from the rescheduled mobilisation date, once confirmed, to actual production from Lidsey-X2. A further announcement will be made in due course.”
The Angus share price closed at 31.3p, up 31% on the day and recovering from most of its recent losses.
Categories: Regulation
DRILL OR DROP? 
Funny how you lot are all over a minor infringement of planning permission conditions by an oil company (when the approved route is blocked), but it’s fine for a load of protestors to build a shanty town in a “local beauty spot”. Total hypocrisy of the worst kind.
“A minor infringement?” Try telling that to a driver with his family in the car who comes round a blind bend at 50mph and smacks straight into the front of an artic on the wrong side of the road, or who has to brake hard and gets rear-ended killing his children!
I know this road well and I can assure you that this lorry-traffic restriction has been put in place for VERY good reasons. [Edited by moderator]
If the council are that bothered they’ll ask the proud owner of the concrete blockade to move it!
Have you been along the A29 at that spot, Benjamin? It is horribly dangerous with 2 bends & a 50mph limit. Last Saturday I went past & saw a crashed car just around one of the bends. Angus are breaking a Section 106 legal agreement.
Yes I have, although the speed limit is 50, I tend to slow down as it tightens up. Why aren’t drill or drop or the weald watch encouraging the council to do something about the blockage if the primary concern is for safety??
The difference is that we have been told that Gold Standard Regulations will ensure the safety of this industry. We are told time and time again that these companies will,be complying with Gold Standard Regulations when in reality they repeatedly please themselves. What is more as with Lancashire County Council where Cuadrilla is concerned, the miscreants receive nothing more than a letter from the Council and then carry on breaching every rule they please.
This is a joke, right? People are really complaining about a vehicle by-passing a blocked road to make a delivery, and yet it is okay for a group of mis-fits to cause traffic chaos by stopping traffic without warning in the same area! This is a comedy website.
Actually terri, the comedy is all on your side. There is no group of people (misfits or otherwise) causing traffic chaos in the Lidsey area. I think you’re getting it confused with PNR. Pay attention . . . .
Why aren’t the council looking into fly tipping of concrete bollard in the approved entrance or the police looking into the theft of signage. That’s right they are too busy stopping idiotic protesters lorry surfing and causing disruption to the area
As reported previously, the concrete block is placed across the access road by the farmer who owns the land to discourage trespassers on his fields. When Angus are expecting a delivery, they can ask the farmer to move the block.
Ok then. Stop all uk oil production because a lorry used the wrong road. We can make up the shortfall from south America, they only need to clear the amazon rain forest then ship it across the Atlantic. The world would be safe then!
Actually it’s 3 breaches of section 106 of the LEGAL agreement Angus made, LEGAL being the word and when I last looked camping is legal. The breach could have caused a serious accident on a dangerous road , then who would be calling it minor? These breaches are just showing the kind of operation that the government called Gold Standards but then I’m not an investor so I may have different opinions .
The blockage was put there by a local farmer who will move it for deliveries to site , Angus just couldn’t be bothered to call him up , go ask him yourself like we did.
It’s quite an assumption to say “angus couldn’t be bothered to call him up”. How the hell do you know that? I don’t think facts or a lack of tend to bother you too much when it comes to propping up your flimsy arguments.
Not having visited the site, it’s hard to understand what this is all about.
From info above, and past posts it seems that
There is an access road to a waterworks, at the side of which is the drill site.
Presumably water works access is along the straightest lane from the main road.
Angus need to ignore the existing road and negotiate a winding track.
The track also provided access to a small industrial estate.
The amount of traffic to said industrial estate is so small, a farmer puts a concrete block in front of it! I.e. No one uses it normally. Suggesting that it is nor really access to an industrial estate or the drill site.
My guess is that all traffic uses the water works road ( cars, vans, lorries), and when a large lorry turns up it uses the road every one else does, including protestors.
The large lorries, when leaving the site briefly occupy the opposite carriageway, hence unsafe.
But I could be wrong of course so happy to be corrected.
I am not sure why Angus and the council agreed to a plan that sounds flawed. For the few large vehicles they need a plan b presumably
What vehicle speed along these roads during harvest times?? Any responsible driver should be expecting to encounter obstructions along such roads at this time of year, especially when moving round a blind bend. Has no one considered how farmers move a combine harvester from one field to another?
Yes, John, you have different opinions and we know why. It doesn’t make you superior to investors, or more correct, it just means you are determined to stop these developments with any means at your disposal, even when it causes you so much insomnia.
It is now around 8.30am and I have already witnessed a number of breaches of any sensible traffic management plan (if there was one, but there isn’t) at a building site close to my property, with delivery vehicles obstructed a busy road, and major bus route. Over 40 houses being built. Another 4 such sites within 2 miles of my property where exactly the same happens. And no lids on their skips! But those buyers desperate for those houses could always try camping.
.
When I lived in Bognor, I cycled the A29 every day to work in Barnham. It is one of those roads where you have to keep up the pace or someone will knock you off from behind but keep the brakes ready in case something pulls out of the hundreds of hidden entrances along it. The prospects for a cyclist are terrifying if they come round one of those blind bends to find an artic in the middle of the road and a car swerving round it. My friend’s teenage daughter rides a moped that route twice a day. The restrictions are valid. let Angus pay for a new access road, avoiding the ‘local beauty spot’ of course, Benjamin my dear.
The council seems to have limited abilities to penalise drivers who flout this very sensible safety condition and use the wrong site entrance. Since injunctions seem to be the weapon of choice for oil companies these days, perhaps the council could apply for an injunction against drivers using the wrong entrance? Drivers would then risk contempt of court. Perhaps the police could charge drivers with dangerous driving? At the very least, if intent on breaking the regulations, drivers should use a couple of assistants to warn oncoming traffic in both directions – before someone gets killed or seriously injured.