Stop the Pylons!

Our beautiful farm is in the crosshairs of the scheme and is under a potential compulsory purchase order, what this means is that if central government approve the plans our farm may well be purchased by National Grid and pylons could be erected anywhere on our land.  This will, of course, be a devastating personal tragedy as we have built the house and business from scratch.  We also see ourselves as custodians of the environment and have planted close to 2,000 trees around the farm and have actively encouraged re-wilding resulting in a number of rare birds nesting in the hedgerows.  Our trekking business, which so many love and have enjoyed over the years, will also be similarly affected and may need to be closed entirely.  Truly, this will be a catastrophe for us personally and all the animals and plants that we look after and nurture.

Please ask your friends, family and neighbours to complete the feedback form. There is no restriction on the number you can submit – nor is there any age restriction. You don’t have to live in Derbyshire.

There are 3 options for completing your form or registering your opinion

Option 1 – The forms are lengthy and complicated and discourage anyone from completing them so we are helping people to do just that, if you can provide us with your basic details on the following form, we will fill in the answers that are outlined in the remainder of this web page and submit on your behalf Pylon Objection Form.

Options 2 – If you would rather complete your form online then you can do so by clicking the following link www.nationalgrid.com/chesterfieldtowillington

Option 3 – Send an email to chesterfield-willington@nationalgrid.com – PLEASE ENSURE THAT IF EMAILING FEEDBACK YOU PUT IN THE TITLE THAT THE EMAIL SHOULD COUNT AS YOUR CONSULTATION FEEDBACK ON THE CHESTERFIELD TO WILLINGTON SCHEME.

When a feedback form is submitted online (either by you or by us), it will be important that you provide an email address so that your submission can be verified by National Grid. You will be sent a verification email from National Grid, and only after you have responded to this email, will your submission be registered.

The final date for Stage 1 Consultation Feedback is Tuesday 17th September!

You can include as many areas as you wish, but if you are wanting to submit feedback relating to Brackenfield Alpacas you just need to complete section 2 (Stretton to Ripley).

Below are some examples of how best to answer each question (black) along with guidance notes (blue).  Thankfully you do not have to complete all the answers on the form and below are the ones (with corresponding question numbers) that we encourage you to complete:

About You

[Complete your details ensuring you complete the question ‘How would you describe your interest in Chesterfield to Willington?’]

1a) Do you have any comments to make on our work to identify our preferred strategic option?

Why are you not following your own guidance which states a preference to follow existing infrastructure to limit the effect on communities e.g. Use M1 or A50 corridors or the routes of existing lower voltage lines.

Not enough importance has been placed on the Amber Valley as an invaluable amenity, which is used not only by those living within the valley but also the wider communities of Clay Cross, Danesmoor, Handley, Stretton, Higham, Woolley Moor, Brackenfield, Wessington, Ashover and South Wingfield and beyond. This will have a significant impact of the mental health and wellbeing of these communities.

National Grid are not following the Holford Rules in route selection which state that ‘major areas of high amenity value should be avoided altogether’

The local economy has been significantly disadvantaged by the disappearance of industry and coal mining. Employment and income from visitors are both critical to the local economy with many farms and dwellings diversifying into holiday letting, farm shops and café’s. This has not been effectively considered.

It has not been considered that the Amber Valley is classified as an Area of Multiple Environmental Sensitivity (AMES) – Ogston Reservoir, Ancient Woodland and Priority Habitat lowland pasture, and unique geology and habitat. The Amber Valley is at least as significant as the Peak National Park in its unique landscape, quality and biodiversity

The Amber Valley is of significant heritage importance, not only due to the setting of Wingfield Manor (Grade 1 listed), Ogston Hall (Grade II*), Crich Stand (Grade II*), and the many Grade II listed buildings in the valley and in settlements such as Higham, but also due to its ancient archaeological heritage, such as the Roman Road (Rykneld Street). This has not been effectively accounted for in the assessment.

2a) Do you agree with the Emerging Preferred Corridor that has been identified for each section of the proposed route? (tick boxes to Agree or Disagree)

[We suggest you tick the Strongly Disagree boxes in particular for Section 2 Chesterfield Substation to Stretton and Section 3 Stretton to Ripley]

2b) Please tell us the reason for your answer. Please also use this box to provide any comments you might have about the work we have done to identify our Emerging Preferred Corridor.

[Please be as specific as you can on reasons why the Amber Valley should be avoided. Remember that these pylons are so high that they will be visible from many of the communities that are not in the Amber Valley itself and up to 17 miles away].

The Amber Valley is an area of significant amenity value to the area with distinctive beauty, originally under consideration to be part of the Peak District National Park. It is an important amenity, not only to those living within the valley but also the wider communities of this area of Derbyshire and beyond.

The route is close to Ogston Reservoir which is a Site of Special Scientific Interest and important for 1000’s of migratory and native birds and other wildlife.

Ogston Reservoir is also home to a sailing club (where Ellen MacArthur learnt to sail) and the impact upon this amenity, where setting is important will be devastating

Ogston Hall is a Grade II* listed building – much of the charm and importance of Ogston comes from its setting which will be significantly destroyed by NG’s suggested route through the Amber Valley.

Wingfield Manor is a Grade 1 listed building under the stewardship of English Heritage and of national importance. The setting of this building will be destroyed by the pylons

• Higham, which overlooks the valley is an important Conservation Area with c. 40 Grade 2 listed buildings some dating back to the 15th Century. Higham is built on a Roman Road deliberately placed on an escarpment chosen for its defensive position and views. There was a Roman Camp and a signalling tower at Tank Corner on the A61. North East Derbyshire District Council’s own policy document on Conservations Areas states: “It is the quality of the architecture, visual character and historic interest of these areas that makes them special and worthy of conservation” and references the following important factors ‘in determining their quality and character’ o Vistas into, from, through and around the area under consideration.
• The interaction of the natural and the built environment.
• The age and social history of the area and its buildings.
• The use of materials in buildings, boundaries, paths and open areas.
• The Amber Valley is part of the Derbyshire Peak Fringe National Character Area (NCA), important for its unique landscape and biodiversity. It is also an Area of Multiple Environment Sensitivity and hence entirely unsuitable for this significant infrastructure. This unique ecosystem has developed over millennia and once destroyed by the building of the pylons will likely never recover.
• For a significant proportion of visitors to Derbyshire, the Amber Valley and the vista from the A61 and other routes above the valley are their first sight of this unique and beautiful landscape, with the Amber Valley known as the gateway to the Derbyshire Peaks. This is another reason why the landscape has been protected and development limited. This view will be forever blighted and will set in train the inevitable and ongoing degradation of this area of Derbyshire.
• The land south of Handley Lane contains one of the largest areas of Priority Habitat Lowland Meadow in Derbyshire and is Class A protected from development and EIA
• There are many Ancient Woodlands in the Valley (some unregistered) and Priority Habitat Inventory Deciduous Woodland, beginning immediately south of Handley Lane

In addition to the many and varied species of birds including buzzards, hawks and owls, bats, deer, and badgers also reside in the Valley

The valley has a unique tranquillity, where natural sounds, such as streams and birdsong are predominant. and where the sound of electricity cables will permanently impact. The valley naturally retains moisture and mist especially in the mornings and according to NG’s own research will result in even greater noise.

Most of the fields, woodland, and even roads in the Valley are largely unchanged from hundreds of years ago and it is inconceivable that National Grid could build this infrastructure in the Valley without permanently destroying the ancient character of these.

Overall, in assessing and costing this route National Grid have failed to take account of the broader (and longer lasting) financial costs to the local economy which relies heavily on tourists and visitors to the area. The Amber Valley also acts as an important overflow to the Peak District National Park which is already suffering from extreme visitor numbers

Both the government and the local authorities have prioritised the provision of accessible green spaces for communities for health and wellbeing and this route through the Amber Valley completely undermines this.

In identifying their preferred corridor National Grid appear to have discounted certain routes altogether to avoid individual properties (where mitigations/ limited undergrounding/ Compulsory Purchase Orders would be possible) and chosen the Amber Valley which will impose enormous financial and non-financial harm to thousands.

The route that National Grid are proposing through the Amber Valley is actually significantly longer than they have indicated in their documentation and therefore significantly more expensive.

One of the reasons why NG appear to have discounted the M1 corridor as a viable route is because of it being seen from Hardwick Hall. Hardwick Hall already has a compromised view due to the M1 and the lower voltage cables route that is already there. The incremental impact on the vista (and visitor numbers) from Hardwick Hall of new 400Kw power lines will therefore be considerably less than the impact on the Amber Valley.

The suggested route fails to comply with the National Grid’s stated intention to follow existing infrastructure corridors, as specified in section 5.4.4 of their document. Routes that followed the M1 or A38 would be more appropriate in this respect, including the recently abandoned route for HS2

 3b) Do you have a preference for it to go east or west of Stretton?

Neither route is acceptable.

The cost to the environment, livelihoods and the wellbeing of the communities in the surrounding areas means it is worth the small additional cost (although there may not be any) to National Grid of using a more logical alternative route away from homes and countryside and follow the route of the M1 motorway.

The land to the south of Handley Lane is Priority Habitat Lowland Meadow that is irreplaceable and also includes ancient woodland.

These routes into the Amber Valley will significantly impact the landscape and beauty of a unique valley on the edge of the Peak District – Derbyshire Peak Fringe National Character Area (NCA) This relates not only to the power lines and pylons but the significant disruption and degradation of the landscape in the process of installation.

The pylons will be seen from up to 17 miles away.

They Amber Valley Is a unique landscape and unspoilt countryside that attracts ramblers, cyclists and tourists delivering important income for farms/ dwellings (lettings), and local pubs/ cafes and the routes proposed are entirely unsuitable

The Valley from Handley to Toadhole Furnace is an important amenity for those living within it, but also Clay Cross, Stretton, Higham, Pilsey and other towns/ villages

The Valley is home to Deer, Badgers, Barn Owls, Bats, (and thousands of migrating birds, with over 250 species at Ogston Reservoir) and any route that goes into the valley will therefore cause significant harm

 [Please also add your own examples of the impact of this specific route to you, your property, etc.]

4a) Do you have any general comments about these aspects at this stage that you would like us to consider?

[If your feedback relates to a specific location, or any features we should look to avoid, please reference this here.]

[Please add your own specific examples of the impact of the suggested route. You can use some of the areas listed above such as landscape, impact on livelihood, mental wellbeing, tourism, heritage, archaeological sites etc.]

We often visit Brackenfield Alpacas to spend time with the alpacas and enjoy the beautiful views across the valley, we particularly enjoy this day out as it helps us to relax and greatly benefits our mental well-being, this will be very badly damaged if pylons are erected in the area.

The proposal takes the pylons over Ancient Woodland, and Priority Habitat Lowland Meadow and will adversely effect our days out in the Amber Valley.

We visit the valley for the unspoilt open spaces and magnificent views, building pylons here will have a disproportionate negative impact on people’s lives and livelihoods compared to erecting the pylons in more industrial areas, especially impacting property values, mental health, tourism revenue etc.

 5a) Is there anything we could do to reduce the effects of a new overhead line?

If your feedback relates to a specific location, or any features we should look to avoid, please reference this here.

Do not go through the Amber Valley.

Choose a route that does not have an adverse impact on wildlife corridors and the wildlife currently in an area.

Choose a route in more industrial corridors with easier access for both building and maintenance without affecting ancient heritage features and important habitats

Choose a route that will not negatively affect investment in the area.

Account for all the financial and non-financial costs of the route, present and future, to ecosystems, wildlife, environment, the local economy, health and well-being of communities – not just the immediate financial outlay of building the pylons

Following an existing infrastructure corridor, such as the M1 will reduce all of the above adverse effects I have mentioned as would going offshore, rather than going down the centre of the country through countryside and residential areas.

Follow the line of existing 132kV cables which could more easily placed underground and with these being replaced with a new 400kV transmission line.

 [This question also asks for feedback relating to specific locations and features so be as specific as you can e.g. the proposed route runs directly over an Ancient Woodland]

5b) Are there any other considerations we should consider when developing our proposals?

The landscape, conservation area and biodiversity are important reasons why people live in the Amber Valley and why they are good caretakers of the Valley, its environment, buildings and flora/ fauna.

If Pylons are introduced there will, over time, be a significant degradation in this landscape as smaller farms make way for larger farms, tourists disappear, and the local economy shrinks dramatically

The Holford Rules (and the new Governments planning policies) heavily favour green spaces (as distinct from brown or ‘grey’ routes). Your preferred route is completely at odds with these policies.

You have discounted the Ratcliffe on Soar Power Station route with its existing infrastructure (even if these need to be upgraded) for unspecified technical reasons. It appears more likely that it was identified as a potential Freeport which is now unlikely to happen under the current Government. The only blocker to this route would be different planning and commercial entities working together, but joined up thinking is critical to avoid destroying all our remaining green spaces. The use of Ratcliffe as a hub should be reconsidered with links via the existing transmission lines.

 5c) In addition to our Community Grant Fund, are there other ways in which you would wish to see local communities benefit from hosting new electricity transmission infrastructure?

The pylons will irreparably harm the amenity of the Amber Valley area and its local economy. No Community Grant Fund will reverse that nor cover the total financial and non-financial costs to the community.

 6A) Please let us know how you heard about this consultation by ticking one or more of the following boxes:

[Tick the appropriate box for you. If you only heard about the consultation from a neighbour or through Brackenfield Alpacas, you might feel you want to be clear about this by using the ‘other’ box and writing in where you heard about – we have been told that National Grid only communicated to people very close to the preferred corridor despite the impact of the Pylons much further afield]

6B) Please rate the information included as part of this consultation in terms of how clearly it was presented and how easy it was to understand:

[Tick the box you feel appropriate for you. Do you agree that the information included by National Grid as part of the consultation was easy to understand? Give your reasons. For example: You might feel that the information that came through the post was easily confused with junk mail and you might have thrown it away. You may not have realised something ‘Chesterfield to Willington’ concerned pylons in your area. You might feel that the maps were not easy to read and it was not easy to work out where your house or area was on the map?]

6C) Please rate how well the consultation was promoted and advertised to the public:

[Tick the box you feel is right for your experience and give your reasons. E.g. How did you hear about the consultation. Did you see it advertised? Did you have to rely on being told about the proposals from your neighbours, friends or campaign group? We do not feel the proposals have been well advertised to all those likely to be impacted given the scale of what is proposed]

6D) Did you attend one of our face-to-face or online consultation events?

[Tick the box for the event you attended or ‘no’ if you didn’t attend one]

6E) How informative did you find our consultation events and/ or our consultation materials

[Tick a box for how informative you found the event then you can use the box in 6f to give more details if you want to. Generally, the online events were found by many people to be quite vague and only give the information that was already available in the printed materials]

6F) Do you have further comments about our consultation process or anything we can improve about our consultation?

[You can use this box for any further comments about the consultation process and how they could improve it]

7 – Additional questions – Net Zero

[Complete the following questions at your discretion. It is unclear why the questions in this section are relevant and are included within this feedback form. The feedback form relates to the proposed route, which is not related to a person’s personal opinions on climate change. We are not objecting to Net Zero just the routing of the pylons. We object to this narrative that National Grid are inferring that we are NIMBY’s and are stopping Net Zero by objecting to the proposed route]

7A) Given the goal to deliver Net Zero Carbon emissions in the UK by 2050 and the need to facilitate the connection of new renewable generation in the region, to what extent do you agree with the identified need for Chesterfield to Willington (as described on Page 16 in the project background document and in the Strategic Options Report)?

[If you want to complete this section read the whole question before ticking a box. This question is asking about delivering Net Zero but also about if you agree with the identified need for Chesterfield to Willington specifically, in a single question with one tick box response. So ‘agree’ means you agree with the need for Chesterfield to Willington not that you agree with Net Zero (but not Chesterfield to Willington. If you want to answer it use the space in 7b to clarify your answer.]

7B) Please use this space, if you wish, to expand on the reason for your answer.

[If you want to answer this you might like to say something like you are supportive of reaching Net Zero but that you do not believe the proposal is a green option for doing that and that alternative routes would be less destructive of the environment]

7C) How concerned are you about the following? Please tick as relevant

[Again, it is unclear why the questions in this section are relevant and are included within this feedback form. The feedback form relates to the proposed route, which is not related to a person’s personal opinions on climate change. You do not have to answer all the questions if you do not want to]