Representation by Mike Schofield
- Date submitted
- 10 July 2024
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
Morecambe & Morgan windfarms - comments on proposed windfarm substations Commentator: Mike Schofield Address: [REDACTED] Email: [REDACTED] I write as a resident of the small village (Newton) that is apparently to have the privilege of not one but two windfarm substations on its immediate borders. 1. The presentations and documentation we have seen imply that there has been a well-advertised process of consultation carried out. In fact, the first time that my wife and I were made aware of these windfarms was from our local group, Newton Residents Association (NRA) followed by a letter form our local MP for the Fylde, Mark Menzies. Both these came to our (my wife and I) attention at the start of November leaving very little time to formulate any meaningful comments. There was apparently a public discussion of these proposals at our local village hall towards the end of October but by the time we were aware of this, the date had come and gone. 2. The whole process gives the impression that the siting of the two substations has been decided on already. The maps made available show two proposals for Morecambe Bay and one for Morgan in zone 1 and no provision whatsoever in zones 2, 3 or 4. Why is this and what is the rationale behind the selection of the four sites in the first place. The documents made available to the public do not comment on this. 3. Taking a cynical view, a decision appears to have been has been made that siting two substations at the side of a small village called Newton, which according to the 2021 census had a population of 1,507 people, would invoke less uproar and controversy than locating it in either Hutton (2,141) or Longton (10,904). 4. It is not made clear as far as I can see why two substations are required. The electricity comes onshore at one point in Blackpool and finishes up at one station at Penwortham. Why then are two substations required to get the power there? 5. No account appears to have been taken of the fact that Bluefield Renewable Developments Limited already have proposals in place to construct a solar farm on land to the west of Parrox Lane in Newton, which appears to lie within the confines of zone 1. This is projected to take up approximately 32 hectares of good agricultural land. At a time when food security is becoming an increasingly important matter in global terms, losing land like this from agricultural use is not justifiable. 6. An important question to ask is why the cables are coming ashore at Blackpool and across the Fylde at all. Looking at a map, it would appear that a simpler route would be down the Ribble estuary and onshore around Bottom of Hutton where there is a far lower population density and a much shorter land journey to the main station at Penwortham. This question is not even considered in the proposals. The current proposals would appear to involve taking cables across either the A583 Blackpool Road or the A584 Preston New Road to access the power station at Penwortham. Either of these will doubtless cause further disruption and either major hold-ups to traffic with significantly increased journey times or major diversions again with increased journey times. Neither of these would seem to contribute to the country’s target of reducing carbon emissions and hitting net zero. 7. Another matter not dealt with anywhere is the impact on local house prices. A recent study by Oxford Brookes University suggested house prices within a short distance of a substation could decline by up to a third if overhead pylons were used to transmit the electricity. Other surveys indicate a potential fall of up to 10% if underground cables are used. What are the developers proposing to do to compensate local house owners for these potential falls in house values? 8. A point raised in the proposals concerns the impact on biodiversity but no clear indications are given as to how zone 1 will regain its biodiversity after the project is completed. The argument seems to be that because there is more biodiversity at the other three zones, zone 1 is the choice. How has biodiversity been measured at the four sites and what is proposed to restore it once the substations are up and running? 9. The impact of several years of construction works on the area is not addressed. The whole area, not just Newton, has been subject to more than three years of disruption to enable the construction of Edith Rigby Way from just to the west of Preston to the M55 motorway, a road of roughly four kilometres in length. Now it is being proposed that we undergo a further 4-5 years of building work. Where will access be to the proposed substation sites? It is not feasible to have construction traffic going into and out of the village on a regular basis. There is only one way out of the village – School Lane is no entry on to Blackpool Road, there are traffic lights at the junction of Bryning Lane and Blackpool Road at the Bell & Bottle pub which is the only viable way out and Parrox Lane is a single lane track that would not take the strain of continual use by heavy lorries and the like. Similarly Hall Cross is not served by roads of any size and access there is even more restricted than Newton which at least has the benefit of a major road to the north, the A583. 10. The materials made available show the view of the offshore windfarms from several distant visas but nowhere are there any visual representations of what the substations would look like for various locations in and around the village. We understand that each substation will cover an area equivalent to thirteen football pitches, be over twenty metres tall and be lit up and operational day and night. They will doubtless produce considerable noise and inconvenience to residents. It is important that the visuals are presented to us the villagers so we can see exactly how they will impact on the environment and the enjoyment we can continue to get from living in what is currently a lively and friendly community. There are also no indications in the proposals as to what the permissible levels of light, noise vibration and emissions will be or how they will be monitored nor of the carbon cost of the development works and ongoing carbon cost of running the substations nor what actions will be taken by the developers to offset these. Why not? 11. No detailed maps of the proposals have been made available to the public so it is not possible to accurately assess the impact the proposals will have on the village and the surrounding area. It seems that the proposals have been introduced with the hope that, as noted above, because the village population is relatively small, only limited objections will be raised and these can be easily brushed aside. 12. Housebuilders have to enter into section 106 agreements with local authorities under which any new development work must have a tangible benefit on the local community. Whilst accepting that this is an infrastructure project, it is reasonable to ask what benefit will the village be getting out of this in return for having two large substations with all their attendant problems they will bring both during construction and afterwards. The proposals do not appear to address this fundamental question. 13. As mentioned above at point 4, substantial grade A farmland is already likely to be lost if the proposed solar farm goes ahead. The two substations proposed in zone A will take away further high-quality agricultural land and impact on the nation’s ability to secure its food security. Moreover, the amount of land required for the substations and the solar farm would render the existing agricultural businesses that use the land in question economically unviable, with resulting financial implications for both the land users and the people they employ. 14. The documentation as provided is extremely lengthy and not easy to digest. Navigation is hard and neither the onshore route or the site selection criteria are mentioned or justified. There is supposed to be a green belt between Newton and Kirkham in order that the separate identities of the two communities can be maintained. This is under the Fylde Borough Council plans for the borough. The proposals appear to ride roughshod over this and in fact, taking into account the proposed solar farm as well, mean very intensive development for industrial purposes and a significant area of industrialisation in what up to now has been a rural farming community. 15. There is no mention of any jobs becoming available to the local community should the substations get the go-ahead. What is the position vis-à-vis this? If no jobs are being created for local people from what are extremely large developments, why is this?