Representation by Mssrs Hutchings (Mssrs Hutchings )
- Date submitted
- 6 November 2023
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
The Hutchings Family own [REDACTED] and are directly affected claimants. As their land agent, I have made RWE aware of particular sensitivities that impact this farm. I have therefore been surprised that RWE have not accounted for these concerns, but have instead presented a one-size-fits-all style of agreement upon all landowners. For example: - RWE is aware that the cable route goes through known areas of former landfill. Nevertheless, they have presented terms suggesting that the landowner shall be liable for the cost of dealing with any contamination that RWE might find on the route. It's inevitable that contamination will be found. It would otherwise be left in the ground with no consequences for the landowner, so it’s grossly unreasonable to expect the landowner to pay for the clear-up costs as a direct result of RWE disturbing the landfill. - As agents, we have been in dialogue about two important development opportunities. House builders have proposals to develop the farmyard area and we have requested that the cable route does not impact on this area. Heads of terms have also been signed for the installation of a third-party solar farm, which is directly on the route. The cable route remains too close to the proposed development site, and the proposed terms are incompatible with a solar farm. - This is already a difficult agricultural holding. It is very wet and low-lying land and therefore only suitable for grassland. Furthermore, the farm is dissected by multiple railway lines, that has split the farm into 4 blocks. Access from one block to another is via railway crossings, or a narrow underpasses. As a consequence, this is a very labour-intensive farm, partly because of the time it takes to travel, but also because operations can only be undertaken by small and narrow machinery suitable for the underpasses. The above problems are made significantly worse because RWE have proposed to go through the middle of the farmland blocks, instead of tight up against the railway. This splits the farm from 4 blocks into 7 and appears to be unnecessary and wasteful. The retained land will become too small and inefficient to farm. Despite raising these concerns with RWE and their agents on multiple occasions, the route of the cable has not altered. We have sought minor amendments to the route in the form of a few meters, not miles. - The terms of the proposed easement are unreasonable. RWE seek to minimise their exposure to compensation by restricting liability to areas they have ‘broken’ or ‘opened up’. We are nervous that the inefficiencies in being able to farm the rest of the land will be disregarded as a consequential loss and therefore not compensable in the normal way. - With other development expected, it is inevitable that other services or indeed new drainage ditches might need to across the easement strip. The proposed easement terms are too restrictive in allowing any such work or activity. RWE want to approve all works, regardless how minor they may be, and have not given any assurances that ditches, cables etc will be permissible. - RWE are trying to impose unreasonable terms that effectively allow them to cheat BNG by planting trees anywhere on the farm. They are not proposing to pay landowners for the loss of farmland, and there are no opportunities to discuss or agree tree locations and species in advance. Most areas of this holding is not suitable for trees because it would threaten it’s rare bird life. Highways England have fully disclosed, mapped and consulted on their BNG locations with infrastructure schemes in the area and we therefore question why RWE have not done the same. - We note that the environmental statement justifies the abandonment of a route through the Norfolk Estate, because it would threaten a site where curlew have been released under a Natural England licence. [REDACTED] hosts a variety of very rare wetland birds including 16 curlew, the Black Tailed Godwit, Cattel Egret and Little Egret. We are not aware that the impact on these birds have been assessed in anyway and cannot understand why the cable has been allowed in such a sensitive location, yet avoids other areas where the bird life is less important. - In light of the above, there are many concerns about this application by RWE. The overriding concern is that RWE have not made slight amendments to the route, or small changes to the proposed easements, to reflect the individual concerns of the claimants. - We wish to point out, that Key Terms were issued in March 2023, but we said negotiations would be meaningless until we saw the actual proposed easement document. There has been resistance by RWE to release this document, and these have only been circulated in the last month. The smallprint within the documents are very worrying and were not relfected in the key terms. - We request that the easement strip is made narrower (perhaps this is possible now that few turbines are proposed), that it is laid tight up against the railway and assurances are given concerning its compatibility with the proposed developments on the farm. The impact to the rare bird life must be clearly understood and mitigated. The proposed easement terms must be fair on the landowners and should not attempt to impose costs on the landowners, or limit compensation beyond what is normally considered to be reasonable.