FreeUnst

In the news today:- https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/work-shetland-space-port-grinds-31473181

Strange announcement: https://www.shetlandtimes.co.uk/2023/08/18/saxavord-spaceport-says-project-firmly-on-track

UCC Minutes 05/06/23 SaxaVord Space Port (SAXA) Frank Strang, CEO, gave an update on their progress. He said work had begun 14 months ago and, in that time, they had spent 30 Million pounds, none of which has come from the public purse. The Civil Aviation Authority has completed an audit for the Space Port Licence and have said that SaxaVord is leading the way, by about two years. Mr Strang believes they should get the Space Port licence in about 8 weeks time. [NB it is more than 8 week now] Once this happens, he said that the eyes of the world will be on Unst. They are still planning to have 30 launches a year. Each actual launch lasts about 40 seconds. The Space Port needs to be a sustainable business. Mr Strang was asked how often they needed to apply for licences. He explained that licences carry on perpetually, but that the Space Port is constantly audited and monitored. Licences can be taken away if they don’t pass arduous, rigorous assessments. Mr Strang said that the Range licence should be awarded 6 to 8 weeks after the Space Port one. The first Suborbital launch is planned for the beginning of October, this will be done by HyImpulse. This will be an historic moment. The next launch will be an Orbital one in the spring next year. This will be the first launch in UK/Europe. The next launch will be by Lockheed Martin. Mr Strang explained that the SaxaVord STEM programme had reached 250,000 children online. He hoped the programme might reach 1 million by Christmas. The Secretary of State for Transport and his team will be visiting the Space Port in August. There have also been inquiries from the 1st Minister’s Office as well. Mr Strang said that there will be a lot of media representatives in Unst this week. He explained that the architect’s design for the new accommodation will be going out to community engagement shortly. He is happy with the design and believes there is nothing controversial in it. They are spending 80 – 100 million pounds developing the site. Mr Strang said they had secured £139 million debt facility to drive the project forward. This will include spending money on the airport, runway and hangar. The three main streams for the Space Port are 1) Launches, 2) Tourism/Accommodation and 3) Data. The Space Port have applied to the European Space Agency for £10 million pounds. Mr Strang explained that they are working with Faroese Telecom. He believes it is essential to get good connectivity and hope this might get Government funding into Shetland. Mr Strang was asked if all their funding so far was from ethical sources. Mr Strang said that it was important that the funding came from ethical sources, and subsequently Mr Strang commented that as a part of the Licencing process the UK Government carries out due diligence on the source of the Spaceport funding and if there were doubts as to the efficacy of the funding a licence would not be awarded. He was asked about the exclusion zones for launches. He said that it was 2.4 kilometres from the launch site and that the conditions need to be 30 knots or less of wind. All launch dates and times will be well publicised. Each of the launch pads are for different companies. If a rocket doesn’t work the launch pad will be out of commission for 6 to 7 months. If it went on fire, it would be left to burn out. Mr Strang explained that they need multiple clients to make SVSP viable. There is an emergency response team and there has already been exercises with the various different agencies. He said that if the airport becomes active again there might need to be a small fire brigade crew employed. Mr Strang was asked how the tarring was going. He said that it was almost complete. They will be tarring all the way down the Holsens Brae. They need to get the legalities sorted before they can start on the North Dale stretch of road. The Hangar is being constructed just now. They are three quarters of the way through the building work. SVSP is working with Chris Dyer, archaeologist, on the interpretation facility. Mr Strang said that SVSP now has 80 employees. He explained that one of the things that will be launched in the satellites will be experiments from Life Sciences/Medical Companies. SVSP might look at building a small lab so that this information can be analysed here. There was a lot of discussion about accommodation and housing issues. Mr Strang said that their staff accommodation would be at Saxavord and would not impact on Unst: they will not be looking for accommodation away from Saxavord. There is a shortage of affordable housing on Unst. There was also a discussion about the lack of childcare. Families with children under 3 and no family to help out are struggling to stay here. Mr Strang said that they were all for helping where they could with childcare and would be happy to speak to anyone interest in setting up a childcare facility. He said that SVSP is hosting an Open Day during UnstFest, they will put on food, entertainment and a minibus for people who want to see the site. Claire asked if there were any more questions for Mr Strang. There weren’t. She thanked him for the update, before he left the meeting.

Recent Unst Community Council minutes make for interesting reading. The last minutes available are from 08/12/2022, nothing in last 4 months: SaxaVord SpacePort(SVSP) Frank Strang replied to the list of questions which were compiled and sent after the last Community Council meeting. These questions and answers are attached as an appendix to the minutes. The Community Council expressed their thanks to Mr Strang for answering all the questions as this helped to clarify many of the questions which are being asked by the community. There was a discussion about the Space Port and its progress. A letter from a member of the community was received and circulated before this meeting. The letter outlined a range of concerns which are being “echoed by many, many local people.” The concerns highlighted are the “lack of communication – on progress, on setbacks, on investment, on key players, on new infrastructure.” They believe there seems “to be a news blackout on everything except for what they read in the paper, or online news. That is what the Spaceport wants us to know.” Concerns were also outlined about the state of the roads which they say,“are disintegrating, mud makes the Setters hazardous, many windscreens have been chipped by rock-loaded heavy trucks travelling too fast and ferries are difficult to book because of massive freight trucks.” The correspondent believes there should be a public meeting so that the community has an opportunity to get the latest position on the project, which is massive especially in a small place like Unst. Councillors discussed this and several of them are being told by the community that they feel there is definitely a lack of communication about what is happening. And in a small place like Unst there are always various rumours about what is and isn’t happening. Michael (Duncan, Community Council Liaison Officer) declared an interest in this item as a family member works for the Space Centre, so he could take no part in any discussion about it. He did advise the Community Council to contact members of the Council if there were any queries about the work done so far; planning; roads; infrastructure etc. Members were told that there is a newsletter being compiled just now which will be available in the next week or so. There was a debate as to whether this would be an online newsletter or a mail shot. Members believe that if it is only available online many residents will not have access to it. Patrick is happy to carry on as the UCC liaison with the Space Centre and contact Frank Strang to ask for a progress report before the next Community Council Meeting. If he gets nowhere with this,he will take it back to the next meeting in January. https://www.shetland.gov.uk/downloads/download/300/unst-community-council-minutes

A news item from today's Shetland News raises some questions on sleaze: https://www.shetnews.co.uk/2021/11/25/tory-mps-paid-role-in-shetland-space-project-shows-rot-at-the-heart-of-westminster-politics/

That's a fair comment. What was meant is that most people probably wouldn't read all that correspondence - that paragraph is buried in a lengthy consultation correspondence about access roads etc. But you are right, it is there for all to read if they wish to do so.

Other news is that the Scottish Environmental Protection Agency formally objected to the project last week, with some an issue over peat extraction: "...we have concerns regarding one of the peat management proposals on the site and unfortunately object to the proposed development in these grounds." There are also appear to be some problems with the road proposals according to several filings on the SIC planning database (application number 2021/005/PPF). One major issue that is hidden from the public is that they are going to shut off public access to the peninsula at Lamba Ness, see this comment from the Roads Authority consultant: "Indeed, subsequent to my original comments regarding access and control I have now become aware of the recently published Space Industry Regulations 2021. Part 11 of these regulations relates to security of the space centre and range control centre. These regulations would appear to have significant implications for public access to Lamba Ness. The apparent impacts of the regulations may make much of the discussions and submissions to date regarding both visitor access and control of traffic along certain public and private roads redundant."

The actual report (http://portal.historicenvironment.scot/document/600029328) is very critical of the application: ++++++++ The application follows limited pre-application discussions from May 2020. Outline information about the proposals was received as part of a consultation in May. HES provided advice in a letter (dated 29 May 2020) which set out relevant policy background and processes, what information would be needed to assess the relevant applications and a preliminary view on the proposals. HES was clear that there were significant challenges involved with proposing an extensive development on a scheduled monument and indicated that further engagement would be required as proposals were developed with the aim of mitigating any adverse impacts. A virtual meeting with the design team in June 2020 was undertaken to discuss our pre-application response, the likely challenges of designing a development in this location and the type and level of information that we would need to be included in any applications to be submitted. As part of that discussion we highlighted the importance of our being able to understand the site selection process for both our roles as consultee in the planning system and consenting authority for scheduled monument consent. The applicant has undertaken 2 years of bird surveys and pre-application discussions with NatureScot. It is not clear why HES was not approached at an early stage for advice, as this would have allowed us to raise the significant challenges with development at this site at a stage where it may have been possible to identify alternative solutions prior to the near finalisation of the proposal’s location, design and layout. In addition, on 30 July 2020 HES provided advice on a report (the SCEPTRE report) that detailed the project’s site selection process. HES’s advice noted that the report did not appear to consider Lamba Ness as a possible development site and requested further information on when Lamba Ness became a candidate site, and why this option was pursued. HES also noted that historic environment designations had not been considered within the site assessment process with environmental considerations focused only on data provided by SNH/Nature Scot, thereby resulting in a potentially flawed site selection process. In November and December HES provided advice on information to be included in any scheduled monument consent application by phone and requested sight of the supporting information to be included with the application in order to give feedback on whether this would be appropriate for the application. In January 2021 some of the supporting information was provided for review; however, this was submitted only days prior to the full application being submitted and it was therefore not possible to provide any advice before the application was received. +++++++ As described in detail above and as acknowledged in the supporting information for the application, the proposed works would be an extensive intervention and have a significant adverse impact on the cultural significance of the scheduled monument. As detailed in the above assessment of the site selection and design process, it has not been demonstrated that alternative locations in Unst have been thoroughly explored in a comprehensive site selection process taking all of the relevant environmental factors into consideration. It has not been demonstrated that there are no other sites in northern Unst that could accommodate the launch site. Additionally, the design iteration process and final layout does not demonstrate that efforts have been made to avoid the known features of the scheduled radar station. The additional mitigation proposed in the draft heritage interpretation strategy is not a primary result or objective of the proposed works, nor does it reduce the impact on the monument or compensate for the loss of the cultural significance to the monument. Benefits of national importance have not been demonstrated in the supporting information supplied with the application. The socio-economic assessment chapter of the EIA Report (Chapter 14) finds that the development would have an overall negligible effect for Scotland and therefore does not demonstrate a benefit of national importance. +++++++ Overall, we find that: • the proposals would result in the loss of over 200 archaeological features associated with the scheduled radar station, resulting in a significant loss of cultural significance • the proposals would remove the intactness and coherence of the radar station which iscurrently a key characteristic of the site’s cultural significance • the new large-scale buildings and infrastructure throughout the monument would interrupt and adversely affect important visual and contextual relationships within the site, reducing the cultural significance of the monument • the new large-scale buildings would become the dominant focal features on the site, overwhelming the remaining radar features and reducing the cultural significance of the monument • access to the monument will be restricted by fences and launch exclusion zones, reducing the ability for visitors to experience and appreciate the monument•the construction of the development would reduce the cultural significance of the monument to such a degree that the site would no longer meet the criteria for national importance • the application has not demonstrated that there are no suitable alternative locations for the proposed development • the application has not demonstrated that the design of the development mitigates the impacts on the cultural significance of the monument • the main element of the mitigation proposed (the Strip, Map and Record exercise) is not appropriate to mitigate the impacts on a nationally important monument • the application has not demonstrated that the development of this specific site (rather than the space programme as a whole) would generate public benefits of national importance which outweigh the impact on the nationally important cultural significance of the monument. ++++++++ When you read all that, you realize some people are "protesting too much"...